À la cour anglaise de la reine consort Henriette Marie (1625-1642), la traduction est utilisée comme outil politique, dont l’un des rôles est d’imposer l’héritage linguistique, culturel et catholique de la reine à l’Angleterre calviniste. La cour d’Henriette Marie devient un véritable pôle d’importation de la littérature et de la culture française et catholique en Angleterre. Pendant le règne de Charles Ier, le mécénat de la reine attire de nombreux traducteurs et traductrices en quête de faveurs royales; pour les obtenir, ces derniers produisent des versions anglaises des genres littéraires en vogue en France (comme les romans pastoraux, la littérature dévote, ou encore les pièces de théâtre). Les activités de ces traducteurs et traductrices n’ont jamais fait l’objet d’études systématiques, ce qui en fait un projet intéressant du point de vue de l’histoire de la traduction et de l’histoire littéraire. La présente étude porte sur les rôles de la traduction et des traducteurs à la cour anglaise de la reine Henriette Marie entre 1625 et 1642. La traduction y est définie comme une pratique instigatrice de liens culturels, politiques et sociaux dans le contexte de l’histoire transnationale entre l’Angleterre et la France. Pour mener à bien mon projet, je m’appuie sur des travaux se rapportant aux aspects culturels et idéologiques de la traduction dans la culture de cour des Stuart et des études récentes sur les traductions imprimées en Angleterre prémoderne. J’étudie le mécénat, la production littéraire et la circulation des textes; puis les réseaux politiques, sociaux, idéologiques et enfin les réseaux de l’imprimé liés à la production de traductions à la cour de la reine pendant le règne de son mari, Charles Ier. Pour ce faire, j’étudie la culture de cour en Angleterre et en France au début du XVIIe siècle, le rôle de la traduction dans cette culture, l’impact de la culture de l’imprimé et de l’histoire matérielle sur le choix des textes à traduire, puis la manière dont ils circulent. En explorant l’histoire culturelle et littéraire du point de vue de la matérialité et de l’agentivité, je reconstitue des réseaux politiques, culturels et idéologiques entre l’Angleterre et le continent européen. Cette thèse par articles réunit deux chapitres rédigés en français dans lesquels je précise le contexte et la démarche de la recherche, ainsi que quatre études de cas rédigées en anglais. Par l’analyse d’un corpus de traductions imprimées à l’extérieur de la Grande-Bretagne, le chapitre 3 souligne l’importance des réseaux culturels transnationaux en Angleterre prémoderne et nous aide à comprendre la production et la circulation des traductions imprimées en Europe au XVIIe siècle. Le chapitre 4 fait état des concepts de l’agentivité et du mécénat en histoire de la traduction et culmine par l’analyse du cas de Thomas Hawkins, agent traduisant, lié à la cour d’Henriette Marie notamment par les traductions qu’il dédicace à la reine. Le chapitre 5 porte sur le rôle des femmes et de la littérature catholique à la cour de la reine Henriette Marie. J’y explore la participation des femmes à la création et à la diffusion de traductions, notamment celle des femmes mécènes, ou encore celles des femmes qui dédicacent des œuvres à des personnalités connues de l’entourage de la reine. Enfin, le chapitre 6 explore les réseaux transnationaux d’échanges culturels entre l’Angleterre et le continent européen à partir d’un traité catholique rédigé par l’auteur français Jean Puget de la Serre, imprimé à Bruxelles, puis dédicacé à Henriette Marie et Charles Ier. Ensemble, ces chapitres visent à dresser un portrait représentatif du contexte culturel, politique et idéologique complexe dans lequel circulaient les traductions imprimées. En annexe, je recense le corpus inédit de traductions imprimées entre 1625 et 1642 et lié à la cour anglaise d’Henriette Marie. Le corpus est en évolution constante; il compte actuellement 78 entrées. L’approche retenue pour le projet est à la fois ascendante et descendante : j’emploie les méthodes d’analyse macro-historiques sous la forme de l’analyse des structures de pouvoir, des institutions et des mécènes, puis, afin de dresser un portrait complet du rôle des traducteurs à la cour de la reine, j’analyse les paratextes, les textes, et les correspondances des traducteurs dans les livres imprimés. La complémentarité de ces approches fait l’originalité de mon projet de recherche et vise à assurer une représentation fidèle des actions entreprises par les agents traduisants à la cour anglaise d’Henriette Marie. De plus, je contribue à la recherche en histoire de la traduction en offrant des données indispensables sur les traducteurs de la première modernité anglaise, leurs pratiques et les réseaux dans lesquels ils opéraient. / At the English Court of Queen consort Henrietta Maria (1625–1642), translation was used as a political tool, partly to impose the queen’s linguistic, cultural and Catholic heritage on Calvinist England. Her court was a veritable hub of imported literature, as well as French and Catholic culture. During the reign of her husband, Charles I, the queen’s patronage attracted male and female translators who sought her protection by publishing English versions of literary genres that were trending in France at the time (such as pastorals, dévot literature, or plays). However, the place of translation in the literary activity that made her court so remarkable has never been systematically studied. The purpose of this project is therefore to offer a comprehensive analysis of the role played by translators and translation in the literary culture of Henrietta Maria’s English Court. In this thesis, translation is defined as a practice instigating cultural, political and social ties in the transnational history linking England and France. My research draws on scholarship pertaining to the cultural and ideological aspects of translation in Stuart Court culture and builds on recent studies on the intersection between translation and print in early modern Europe. I study patterns of patronage, literary production, and text circulation; then I probe the political, social, religious, and print networks involved in the production of translations associated with the Queen’s court and extending well beyond its social or geographical boundaries. Specifically, I examine early 17th-century English and French court culture, the place of translation within this culture, and the impact of print culture and material history on the selection and circulation of translated texts. By studying the cultural and literary history from the perspective of materiality and agency, I recreate the political, cultural and ideological networks that operated between Great Britain and continental Europe. This article thesis begins with two chapters written in French in which I specify the context and chosen approach, and which are followed by four case studies written in English. Through an analysis of translations that are printed outside of Great Britain, the case study in chapter 3 highlights the significance of transnational cultural networks in early modern England and helps us understand the production and circulation of printed translations in 17th-century Europe. Chapter 4 consists of an exploration of the concepts of agency and patronage in translation history and culminates with the case of Thomas Hawkins, a translating agent with ties to the queen’s court and continental Jesuit Colleges. The fifth chapter addresses the role of women and Catholic recusant literature at the court of Henrietta Maria. In it, I investigate the participation of women in the creation and distribution of translations, notably as patrons, translators, and printers. In the final chapter, I explore transnational networks of cultural exchange between England and Europe with, as a starting point, a Catholic treatise written by French author Jean Puget de la Serre, which was printed in Brussels though dedicated to Henrietta Maria and Charles I. Together, these chapters offer a comprehensive analysis of the role played by translators and translation in the literary culture of Henrietta Maria’s English Court. The thesis is followed by the corpus of translations linked to the English Court of Queen Henrietta Maria and printed between 1625 and 1642 that I have established. The corpus continues to expand as I pursue this research, and currently comprises 78 titles. The approach I have selected for this project is both top-down and bottom-up: I use macrohistoric analysis methods to investigate power structures, institutions, and patronage; then, to establish a comprehensive overview of the roles of translators at the queen’s Court, I analyze paratexts, texts, and the correspondence of translators in printed books. The synergy between these approaches lends originality to the project and ensures an accurate representation of the actions of translating agents at the English Court of Henrietta Maria. My work contributes to research in translation history by providing some much needed insight into early modern translators, their practices, and the networks in which they were involved.

No description available.

Mon mémoire vise à définir, analyser, contextualiser et historiciser la censure à la Renaissance à travers l’exploration de diverses œuvres de Shakespeare, notamment les pièces souvent désignées sous le nom d’Henriad— Henry IV partie 1 et 2, Richard II— tout en portant une attention particulière sur Les Sonnets. Cette thèse s’intéresse à l’interpénétration des différentes institutions de censure, ainsi qu’aux différentes façons dont la censure peut se manifester ; à l’hétérogénéité des institutions, des divers agents, ainsi que des censeurs ; à la manière dont certains mécanismes se rejoignent, coopèrent ou divergent à d’autres moments. L’objectif principal est de démontrer que la censure va au-delà des paramètres de quelconque institution ou agent individuel, et qu’elle résulte de l’amalgame de chaque partie impliquée volontairement ou involontairement dans la prolifération de mesures répressives. Finalement, mon étude démontre que les pièces et Les Sonnets de Shakespeare ont été censurés de différentes manières, et cela, par différentes institutions, mais plus important encore, ce mémoire met en évidence que Shakespeare a mis en avant différents stratagèmes adaptables dans le but de contourner la censure de ses œuvres. / This thesis seeks to define, analyze, contextualize, and historicize censorship in the Renaissance through an exploration of Shakespeare’s Sonnets as well as the group of plays often referred to as the Henriad—1 Henry IV, 2 Henry IV, and Richard II. The overarching focus of this thesis is to demonstrate the in-betweenness of censorship—the different ways in which censorship is manifested; the institutions as well as the censors; how different censoring mechanisms merge at certain times, cooperate, or even disagree at others. The goal is to bring forth a clear understanding of the genealogical entity of censorship, to prove that censorship is bigger than any one institution, any one individual, that censorship is an amalgamation of every different susceptible censoring party working together mostly, and sometimes not—voluntarily or involuntarily—in their ever-changing ways of repression. Ultimately, my study of Shakespeare demonstrates that the plays and the sonnets were censored in different ways through different institutions, but more importantly, this paper highlights that Shakespeare had different adaptable ways of circumventing the censorship of his works.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis examines 'improvement' of wetland commons in early modern England as a contested process of rapid environmental change. As a flagship project of agrarian improvement, drainage sought to alchemise pastoral fen commons into arable enclosed terra firma and promised manifold benefits for crown, commoners, and commonwealth alike. In practice, however, improvement schemes generated friction between the political and fiscal agendas of governors and projectors and local communities' customary ways of knowing and using wetland commons, provoking the most sustained and violent agrarian unrest of the seventeenth century. This thesis situates the first state-led drainage project in England, in the northern fens of Hatfield Level, in the context of the local politics of custom, national legal and political developments, and international movements of capital, expertise, and refugees; all of which intersected to reshape perceptions and management of English wetlands. Drawing on the analytic perspectives of environmental history, this thesis explores divergent ideas and practices generating conflict over the making of private property, reorganisation of flow, and reconfiguration of lived environments. This thesis argues that different 'environing' practices - both mental and material - distinguished what was seen as an ordered or disordered landscape, determined when and how water was understood as a resource or risk, and demarcated different scales and forms of intervention. Rival visions of the fenscape, ways of knowing land and water, and concepts of value and justice were productive of, and produced by, different practices of management, ownership, and use. Drainage disputes therefore crossed different spheres of discourse and action, spanning parliament, courtroom, and commons to bring improvement into dialogue with fen custom and generate a contentious environmental politics. In seven substantive chapters, this thesis investigates how improvement was imagined, legitimised, and enacted; how fen communities experienced and navigated rapid environmental transformation; and how political, social, and spatial boundaries were reforged in the process. By grounding improvement in the early modern fenscape, this thesis reintegrates agency into accounts of inexorable socio-economic change, illuminates ideas at work in social contexts, and deepens understandings of environmental conflict.

This thesis examines the life and works of the English Calvinist clergyman Daniel Featley (1582-1645) through the lens of various printed and manuscript sources, especially his manuscript notebooks in Oxford. It links his story and thought to the broader themes of early Stuart religious, political, and intellectual history. Chapter one analyses the first thirty- five years of Featley’s life, exploring how many of the features that underpin the major themes of Featley’s career—and which reemerged throughout his life—were formed and nurtured during Featley’s early years in Oxford, Paris, and Cornwall. There he emerges as an ambitious young divine in pursuit of preferment; a shrewd minister, who attempted to position himself within the ecclesiastical spectrum; and a budding polemicist, whose polemical exchanges were motivated by a pastoral desire to protect the English Church. Chapter two examines Featley’s role as an ecclesiastical licenser and chaplain to Archbishop George Abbot in the 1610s and 1620s. It offers a reinterpretation of the view that Featley was a benign censor, explores how pastoral sensitivities influenced his censorship, and analyses the parallels between Featley’s licensing and his broader ecclesiastical aims. Moreover, by exploring how our historiographical understandings of licensing and censorship have been clouded by Featley’s attempts to conceal that an increasingly influential anti- Calvinist movement was seizing control of the licensing system and marginalizing Calvinist licensers in the 1620s, this chapter (along with chapter 7) addresses the broader methodological issues of how to weigh and evaluate various vantage points. Chapters three and four analyse the publications resulting from Featley’s debates with prominent Catholic and anti-Calvinist leaders. These chapters examine Featley’s use of patristic tradition in these disputes, the pastoral motivations that underpinned his polemical exchanges, and how Featley strategically issued these polemical publications to counter Catholicism and anti-Calvinism and to promulgate his own alternative version of orthodoxy at several crucial political moments during the 1620s and 1630s. Chapter five focuses on how, in the 1620s and 1630s, the themes of prayer and preaching in his devotional work, Ancilla Pietatis, and collection of seventy sermons, Clavis Mystica, were complementary rather than contradictory. It also builds on several of the major themes of the thesis by examining how pastoral and polemical motivations were at the heart of these works, how Featley continued to be an active opponent—rather than a passive bystander and victim—of Laudianism, and how he positioned himself politically to avoid being reprimanded by an increasingly hostile Laudian regime. Chapter six explores the theme of ‘moderation’ in the events of the 1640s surrounding Featley’s participation at the Westminster Assembly and his debates with separatists. It focuses on how Featley’s pursuit of the middle way was both: a self-protective ‘chameleon- like’ survival instinct—a rudder he used to navigate his way through the shifting political and ecclesiastical terrain of this period—and the very means by which he moderated and manipulated two polarized groups (decidedly convictional Parliamentarians and royalists) in order to reoccupy the middle ground, even while it was eroding away. Finally, chapter seven examines Featley’s ‘afterlife’ by analysing the reception of Featley through the lens of his post-1660 biographers and how these authors, particularly Featley’s nephew, John Featley, depicted him retrospectively in their biographical accounts in the service of their own post-restoration agendas. By analysing how Featley’s own ‘chameleon-like’ tendencies contributed to his later biographers’ distorted perception of him, this final chapter returns to the major methodological issues this thesis seeks to address. In short, by exploring the various roles he played in the early Stuart English Church and seeking to build on and contribute to recent historiographical research, this study sheds light on the links between a minister’s pastoral sensitivities and polemical engagements, and how ministers pursued preferment and ecclesiastically positioned themselves, their opponents, and their biographical subjects through print.