Constitué par saint Louis en faveur de son fils Pierre, mort en 1284, l’apanage d’Alençon renaît en 1290 lorsque le roi Philippe le Bel l’octroie à son frère Charles de Valois. Sept comtes, puis ducs à partir de 1415, lui succéderont jusqu’en 1525. Cousins des rois et pairs de France, les Valois-Alençon ont fait de cet apanage normanno-percheron le cœur d’une principauté étendue du pays de Caux aux rivages de la Loire, des marches de Bretagne au pays chartrain.Les principats de Pierre II (1367-1404) et de son fils Jean Ier, mort à Azincourt en 1415, marquent l’apogée de cette œuvre politique soutenue par le roi. Désormais enracinés sur l’apanage, les Alençon réforment l’administration des territoires, s’entourent d’officiers polyvalents et dotent leur principauté des institutions traditionnellement dévolues au gouvernement des états : une chancellerie active, une trésorerie générale, une Chambre des comptes et même un Échiquier réputé souverain. Au palais neuf d’Argentan, l’Hôtel comtal accueille quelque deux cent trente officiers et serviteurs et brille d’un éclat jusqu’alors insoupçonné. La démarche prosopographique, qui étudie les caractéristiques sociologiques et les réseaux d’influence façonnant les carrières des agents du pouvoir, guide ici la découverte des administrations princières.Hommes liges du parti d’Orléans, les Alençon paient toutefois au prix fort leur engagement politique. L’occupation lancastrienne (1417-1450) et l’exil, les rançons et l’obstruction durable du duc Jean II à la politique du roi minent leur autorité. La faillite menace et contraint les princes aux pires expédients. Leur incurie aggrave l’isolement qui les frappe jusqu’à ce qu’en 1515 l’avènement au trône de France de François d’Angoulême, « frère » par alliance du dernier duc Charles IV, offre à cette principauté un ultime et éphémère rayonnement. / Formed by Saint Louis in favour of his son Pierre, who died in 1284, the Alençon appanage revived in 1290 when King Philippe le Bel bestowed it upon his brother Charles de Valois. Seven princes, who became dukes as of 1415, succeeded him till 1525. Cousins to Kings and Peers of France, the Valois-Alençons turned the Norman-Percheron appanage into the heart of a principality stretching from the Pays de Caux to the banks of the Loire river, from the « Marches de Bretagne » to the Chartres area.The principates of Pierre II (1367-1404) and his son Jean I, who died in Azincourt in 1415, marked the heyday of this political piece of work supported by the King. Henceforth, rooted in this appannage, the Alençons reformed the administration of territories, surrounded themselves with versatile officers and endowed their principality with institutions traditionally devoted to the governance of states: an active chancellery, a general treasury, an exchequer and even a deemed sovereign court of justice. At the new castle of Argentan, the prince court hosted some two hundred and thirty officers and servants, and sparkled with a so far unsuspected lustre. The prosopographic approach, which studies the sociological features and the influence networks shaping the careers of the agents of authority, herein guides the discovery of the princely administration.

Au sein de la principauté de Morée, fondée à la suite de la quatrième croisade parquelques chevaliers francs dans les territoires de l’ancien empire byzantin, hommes et femmes de l’élite latine participent au maintien de la domination pendant près de deux siècles et demi. S’inspirant des nouvelles tendances de la recherche telles que l’étude des individus par la prosopographie, l’histoire des représentations et du pouvoir des femmes, cette monographie s’attache tout particulièrement à mettre en évidence la place, le rôle et le pouvoir des dames de la Morée franque, du XIIIe au XVe siècle. Au-delà des lieux communs fournis par la pensée médiévale, essentiellement masculine, il s’agira d’analyser l’implication des dames dans les alliances familiales, dans la transmission et la gestion dupatrimoine féodal ou encore dans la vie politique, économique et sociale de la principauté. Organisé en trois parties, ce travail examine d’abord la représentation du féminin dans les sources latines et byzantines, puis il considère la place des dames au sein des familles et des stratégies matrimoniales, enfin il étudie le rôle et le pouvoir de ces femmes dans la féodalité moréote et le gouvernement de la principauté. / Within the principality of Morea, founded after the Fourth Crusade by Frankishknights in the territories of the former Byzantine Empire, men and women of the Latin elite ruled for nearly two and a half centuries. Drawing on new research trends, such as the study of individuals in prosopography, the history of representations and of women's power, this monograph highlights the place, role and power of the ladies of Frankish Morea, from the 13th to the 15th century. Going beyond the commonplace, mostly male, perpectives reflected in medieval thinking, it will analyze the involvement of women in family alliances, in the transmission and management of feudal holdings, and in the political, economic and social life of the principality. Presented in three parts, this work first examines the representation of women in the Latin and Byzantine sources, thenconsiders the place of women in the family and marriage strategies, and concludes by studying the role and power of women in Moreote feudal and government structures.

La présente thèse de doctorat trouve son origine dans la singularité de l’histoire de la seconde Maison d’Anjou (1360-1481), qui se caractérise, à chaque génération, par des temps de rupture au cours desquels les femmes se trouvent en charge de la conduite de l’État comme régente, lieutenante ou en tant que vice-régente. Cette dynastie princière française offre un terrain d’observation privilégié pour décrire et expliquer un phénomène, en cours d’élaboration juridique et pratique à la fin du Moyen Âge, celui de l’exercice du pouvoir politique par des souveraines qui n’auraient pas dû gouverner. Grâce au croisement de sources de nature très variée, il s’agit aussi de mesurer les progrès administratifs ou les évolutions institutionnelles de la principauté auxquels participent les duchesses. Ces dernières ont également joué un rôle essentiel dans la construction territoriale de leur État, permettant de donner corps à une histoire commune d’espaces traditionnellement étudiés de façon indépendante : l’Anjou, la Provence, le Barrois, la Lorraine, Naples. L’étude, qui porte sur plus d’un siècle, repose sur une dialectique entre existence individuelle et fortune collective afin d’offrir une cohérence nouvelle aux problématiques liant l’identité et l’action politique féminine. Celle-ci est abordée au travers d’approches multiples (politique, anthropologique, juridique, quantitative) et de thèmes variés (finances, entourage, gouvernement des corps constitués, guerre, relations diplomatiques). L’analyse met ainsi à jour les mécanismes et les dynamiques par lesquelles, d’un côté, ces princesses exercent leur autorité à l’égal des hommes, comme des femmes « au coeur d’homme », tout en étant, d’un autre, contraintes par les restrictions morales, mentales et juridiques imposées à leur genre, les conduisant à adopter une pratique gouvernementale spécifiquement féminine, à exalter des vertus singulières, voire à tenter de modifier les règles de la politique ordinaire. / This PhD thesis is based on the specificity of the history of the second House of Anjou (1360-1481) characterized in each generation by moments of discontinuity in which women find themselves in state governing positions as regents, lieutenants or vice-regents. This princely French dynasty offers a unique opportunity to observe and analyze a phenomenon that was in the developing stages both judicially and practically at the end of the Middles Ages, namely the exercise of political power by sovereigns who were not supposed to govern. Due to the increasing variety of existing sources, this study will also assess the administrative progress or institutional developments in the principalities where the Duchesses were involved in governing. The Duchesses have also been instrumental in the territorial expansions of their states, enabling the articulation of a common history for areas traditionally studied independently: Anjou, Provence, Barrois, Lorena, and Naples. The study, spanning over a century, draws on the dialectic of individual existence and collective destiny in order to offer a new interpretation to issues concerning women’s identity and political actions. These issues are analyzed using multiple approaches (political, anthropologic, legal, judicial, and quantitative) and various themes (finances, entourages, governing of constitutional bodies, war, diplomatic affairs). As a result, the analysis sheds light on the mechanisms and dynamics by which, on one hand, these princesses exert their authority as men’s equal, as women « with a man’s heart », while on the other hand, forced by their gender’s moral, intellectual and judicial imposed constraints, they adopt a governing style specifically feminine, exalt particular virtues or even change the rules of ordinary politics.

This thesis focuses on Lombard Southern Italy during the early middle ages and it analyses the history of political and social conflicts between the eighth and ninth century, taking into account the transformation of Lombard political power and social practices in this area. Starting from the eight-century judicial sources, this work explores political and social competition in the Beneventan region by taking into account its geographical position at the center of the Mediterranean see. Southern Italy was considered as a periphery, and sometimes as a frontier, by both the Carolingian and Byzantine empires, and endured almost a century of Muslims' attempts to conquer the peninsula. The first chapter focuses on the ducal period and investigates the formation and consolidation of the duke of Benevento's political authority before 774. During the seventh and eight centuries, the dukes developed a military and political autonomy in Southern Italy. This was due to the geographical position of the Duchy of Benevento in the Lombard Kingdom: it was far from Pavia, the king's capital city, and it was relatively isolated from other Lombard territories. Since a dynasty was established here as early as the seventh century, these dukes developed a strong and precocious political consciousness. As a result, they were particularly concerned with the formal representation of their authority, which is early attested in both coinage and diplomas. In this chapter, the analysis of the eight-century judicial records opens two important perspectives on the duke of Benevento's practices of power. Firstly, judicial assemblies were one of the most important occasions for the duke to demonstrate and exercise his authority in a public context. In contrast to all other Lombard dukes, who rendered judgement together with a group of officers, the duke of Benevento acted alone before the competing parties. By behaving exactly as the Lombard king would in Pavia, the duke was able to utilise the judicial domain as a sort of theatre in which to practice, legitimise and represent his own public authority in front of the local aristocracy. Secondly, the analysis of seven judicial case-studies suggests that the duke was not simply the sole political authority in Benevento but also the leading social agent in the whole Lombard southern Italy. Almost all the disputes transmitted by the twelfth-century cartularies implied a ducal action, donation or decision in the past, which became the main cause for later conflicts between the members of the lay élite and the monastic foundations of the region. Consequently, the analysis of judicial conflicts reveals more about the duke of Benevento's strategies and practices of power than about the lay and ecclesiastical élites' competition for power. Since there are no judicial records between 774 and the last decade of the ninth century, both conflicts and representations of authority in Lombard Southern Italy are analysed through other kinds of sources for this period. Chronicles, hagiographies, diplomas, and material sources are rich in clues about political and social competition in Benevento. By contrast, the late-ninth-century judicial records transmitted by cartularies and archives are quite different from the eighth-century documents: they have a bare and simple structure, which often hides the peculiarities of the single dispute by telling only the essentials of each conflict and a concise final judgement. In contrast to the sources of the ducal period, the ninth- and tenth-century judicial records often convey a flattened image of Lombard society. Their basic structure certainly prevents a focus on the representation of authority and the practices of power in southern Italy. On the contrary, these fields of inquiry are crucial to research both competition within the Beneventan aristocracy during the ninth century, and the relationship between Lombards and Carolingian after 774. After the fall of the Lombard Kingdom in 774, Charlemagne did not complete the military conquest of the Italian peninsula: the Duchy of Benevento was left under the control of Arechis (758-787), who proclaimed himself princeps gentis Langobardorum and continued to rule mostly independently. The confrontation and competition with the Frankish empire are key to understanding both the strengthening of Lombard identity in southern Italy and the formation of a princely political authority. The second account the historiography on the Regnum Italiae, the third section of this chapter focuses precisely on the ambitions of Louis II in Southern Italy and it analyses the implication that the projection of his rulership over this area had in shaping his imperial authority. Despite Louis II's efforts to control the Lombard principalities, his military and political experience soon revealed its limits. After the conquest of Bari in 871, Prince Adelchi imprisoned the emperor in his palace until he obtained a promise: Louis II swore not to return to Benevento anymore. Although the pope soon liberated the emperor from this oath, he never regained a political role in Southern Italy. Nevertheless, his prolonged presence in the region during the ninth century radically changed the political equilibrium of both the Lombard principalities and the Tyrrhenian duchies (i.e. Napoli, Gaeta, Amalfi). The fourth section focuses firstly on the competition between Louis II and Adelchi of Benevento, who obstinately defined his public authority in a direct competition with the Carolingian emperor. At the same time, the competition within the local aristocracy in Benevento radically changed into a small-scale struggle between the members of Adelchi's kingroup, the Radelchids. At the same time, some local officers expanded their power and acted more and more autonomously in their district, such as in Capua. When Louis II left Benevento in 871, both the Tyrrhenian duchies and the Lombard principalities in Southern Italy were profoundly affected by a sudden change in their mutual relations and even in their inner stability. The competition for power and authority in Salerno and Capua-Benevento also changed and two different political systems were gradually established in these principalities. Despite the radical transformation of internal competition and the Byzantine conquest of a large part of Puglia and Basilicata at the end of the ninth century, the Lombard principalities remained independent until the eleventh century, when Southern Italy was finally seized by Norman invaders.

L’empire de Constantinople, après un siècle (969-1085) de domination sur de vastes portions de l’Orient (Cilicie, Chypre, Syrie du Nord et Djézireh), et de rayonnement au-delà jusqu’à Jérusalem, dut reconstituer sa présence dans cet espace à partir de la fin du XIe siècle. L’arrivée de nouveaux acteurs chrétiens autonomes, Francs et Arméniens, compliqua l’équation politique de l’Empire, qui ne devait plus uniquement reconstruire sa domination sur ses anciens sujets, mais aussi compter avec ces forces. L’empire de Romanie vécut en Orient, parallèlement aux Croisades, une intense phase de redéfinition de sa réalité régionale, de ses modalités de fonctionnement et de son rôle politique. Cependant, cette expérience, qui se prolongea sur près de deux siècles, ne saurait se limiter à une simple projection de puissance de Constantinople sur cette périphérie. Malgré les bouleversements qui frappèrent le cœur de l’Empire de 1081 à 1289, la référence impériale se maintint en Orient sous les Comnènes, les empereurs latins et nicéens, puis sous les premiers Paléologues. Le processus ne fut durable que grâce à la redéfinition progressive de l’identité impériale locale. Ses contours varièrent par l’adjonction d’éléments hétérogènes, contribuant à complexifier l’empreinte de l’empire de Romanie en Orient. La Romanie orientale fut une solution à l’équation politique des pouvoirs locaux (la principauté d’Antioche, le comté de Tripoli et les royaumes de Chypre et d’Arménie principalement) pour réussir leur intégration régionale en la conjuguant avec un héritage impérial constantinopolitain, incluant l’Orient helléno-arabe. / The empire of Constantinople, after a century (969-1085) of domination over large part of oriental territories (Cilicia, Cyprus, North Syria and Djezireh) during which it exerted its influence over Jerusalem, had to restore its influence in this space from the end of the eleventh century. The arrival of new autonomous Christian players, Francs and Armenians, complicated the empire’s political equation, which had not just to rebuild his domination over its old subjects, but also had to allow for these forces.The empire of Romanie lived in the East, at the same time of the Crusades, an intense period of redefinition of its regional reality, of its modes of running and of its political role. However, this experience, which lasted for two centuries, can’t be confined to a simple projection of Constantinople’s powerful onto this periphery.Despite the disruptions which hit the heart of the empire, from 1081 to 1289, the imperial reference persisted in the East under the Comneni, the Latin and Nicene emperors, and under the firsts Paleologues.The process was lasting because of the gradual redefinition of regional imperial identity. Its contours were varied by the addition of heterogenic elements, which contributed to complicate the imperial mark in the East.Oriental Romania was a solution to the political equation of local authorities (Principality of Antioch, the County of Tripoli and the kingdoms of Cyprus and Armenia mainly) to succeed in their regional integration, combined with an imperial Constantinopolitan heir, including the Hellenic and Arabic East.