Le règne de Louis-Philippe (1830-1848), le roi français le plus anglophile, commence dans une atmosphère anglomane. Différents conflits entre Paris et Londres pendant cette période réveillent néanmoins des pensées anglophobes chez certains Français. Partant de ces trois sentiments qui se distinguent et coexistent à la fois, et à la lumière des différents courants de l’époque, comme le romantisme, le nationalisme et le socialisme, ce travail consiste à étudier les représentations de l’Angleterre sous la monarchie de Juillet. Une étude des relations franco-britanniques depuis le siècle des Lumières jusqu’à la chute du dernier roi français sert de toile de fond à ce travail : elle permet d’éclaircir la vision générale qu’avaient les Français de leurs voisins au cours du temps. Les guides de voyage publiés pendant le règne du roi des Français et les écrits des voyageurs français relatant leurs découvertes et expériences de la vie à l’anglaise au sein de « l’Angleterre commerciale et industrielle » font ensuite l’objet de nos analyses. À cela s’ajoute un examen de leurs considérations relatives à l’état social de cette Angleterre industrielle, dans un contexte où la France commence à suivre elle-même la voie de l’industrialisation. Ces diverses images de la Grande-Bretagne tirées des œuvres des voyageurs semblent toutes indiquer le motif de leurs séjours outre-Manche : étudier l’Angleterre afin d’instruire leur patrie, la France, voire le monde entier. / The most Anglophile French king, Louis-Philippe (1830-1848), commences his rule inan Anglomaniac atmosphere. Throughout his reign though, several conflicts opposing Parisand London are the cause of an unfolding Anglophobic spirit. Starting off from these three feelings that are both distinct and interdependent, and in the perspective of the main contemporary trends like romanticism, nationalism and socialism, this thesis aims at studyingthe various representations of England during the July Monarchy. A study of the evolving Franco-British relationship from the Age of Enlightenment until the fall of the last Frenchking, is the background to this work: it helps understanding the judgment that the French exercised on their English neighbors during this period. Guidebooks published during the“King of the French” regime and writings from French travelers who expand on their discoveries and experiences of the English life within a “commercial and industrial England”,are then an object of analysis. A final aspect of this study focuses on their considerations with respect to the social state of this “industrial England”, in a context when France is pursuing apath of industrialization. Those diverse images about Great Britain extracted from French travelers’ publications are all pointing to the true motive of their stay across the Channel: a circumspect study of England that can be used to educate their own country, France, or eventhe whole world.

Lord Mansfield is typically remembered for his influence in common law and commercial law, and his decision in Somerset v. Stewart , which granted a slave, brought to England, habeas corpus to refuse his forced transportation out of that nation by his master. Both conditions allowed observers to praise him for what they viewed as very modern notions about economy and society (capitalism and anti-slavery, respectively). Mansfield's primary position as Chief Justice of King's Bench in England, which contributed most of the only published material from him, shielded him from any scrutiny about his wider influence in general British governance in the period of his public career, roughly 1740-1790. Throughout his career, Mansfield played a large role in the general government of the British Empire. Beginning with his role as Solicitor General in 1742 and continuing after he became Chief Justice in 1756, Mansfield interacted and advised the highest members of the British ruling elite, including the monarch. Because the nature of British governance in the 18th Century was very porous, Mansfield partook in the exercise of legislative (through his seats in the House and Commons and Lords), executive (through a formal seat on the Privy Council and later in the King's Closet), and judicial (through his roles as Solicitor and Attorney General, Chief Justice of King's Bench, and temporary positions as Lord Chancellor) power practically simultaneously throughout his career. In these capacities, Mansfield contributed to imperial policy at a critical moment. He was a champion for the British Empire as the beacon of the most perfect society at that time - a perspective he developed through his education and experiences during the crucial formative years of the British nation. He channeled his support for Britain into a seemingly rigid dogma that saw any threat or challenge to British authority or culture as inherently illegitimate. In this regard, Mansfield favored British domination over the other imperial powers, and he immediately rejected the earliest complaints of the Americans over British rule. Because of the nature of his position within British governance, Mansfield's view remained constant in a government that witnessed continual turnover. The potential of Mansfield's influence was not lost upon the public. Many factions from "true Whigs" such as John Wilkes, and American patriots viewed him as the epitome of the problem with the British government-its seemingly arbitrary, unconstitutional, and tyrannical posture toward everything. Mansfield posed a particular challenge for these groups because he was a Chief Justice, and they believed he was supposed to adhere to a strong notion of justice. Instead, they saw him continually leading their repression, and so they questioned the basis of the whole British system. Through pamphlets, newspapers, and visual prints, these groups identified Mansfield as a key conspirator, which they attributed to an anti-British disposition. In these ways, Mansfield and his opponents squared off over the definition of true Britishness internally and imperially. When these opponents gathered enough strength (Londoners during the Gordon Riots, and Americans with their War of Independence), they aimed to pull down Mansfield and his comrades for their violations. The former failed to overthrow society, but they arguably hastened a change in government. The latter succeeded in their movement to exit the Empire. The Revolution was not a total transformation for the Americans, however. They struggled to define their new nation and America had similar imperial aspirations. In this environment, Mansfield was the quintessential symbol of early national "leaders" bipolar attitudes towards Britain. Some leaders such as John Adams embraced their British heritage, and used Mansfield as a model to develop a strong, centralized, commercial nation. Other leaders such as Thomas Jefferson saw Mansfield as the chief villain to the idea of America. Jefferson coined the phrase "Mansfieldism" which he identified as a caustic relationship between law and government that favored the development of political and legal elitism that challenged the interests and participation of common citizens. Jefferson viewed Mansfield as the essential symbol of the American anti-revolution. These first-generation independent Americans both remembered Mansfield for his direct participation in the imperial crisis, but for Adams and his fellow Federalists, they had to initiate redemption for Mansfield to justify their program to create America. The redemption was successful. American institutions used Mansfield to fine-tune the balance between their British heritage and uniquely American outlook. As successive generations of Americans emerged into the political sphere, they remembered his seemingly progressive positions on law and society as presented through his court decisions over his actual participation against their independence. Especially through a selective reading of his decision in Somerset, Mansfield became the legal prophet for abolitionist nationalism. His decision arguably provided a legal precedent against the institution of slavery, but it more importantly transformed into the moral imperative of the movement. In this manner, Mansfield became fully redeemed among Americans. / History

This thesis identifies a claimant narrative tradition in nineteenth-century American literature and examines the role of that tradition in the formation of American national identity. Drawing on Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The American Claimant Manuscripts and Our Old Home (1863) as well as Mark Twain’s The American Claimant (1892), I argue that these writers confronted the paradoxical nature of claimant narratives—what Hawthorne called a “peculiar insanity”—which combined a hereditary sympathy between the United States and Britain with exceptionalist rhetoric about American republican values. Hawthorne’s ambivalence toward the claimant tradition identified the paradox, but his writing merely pointed out inconsistencies, while Twain censured with satire and direct social criticism. America’s British sympathies persisted in later decades, and remained a popular subject of fiction throughout the century, making it ripe for parody by the time Twain wrote his own claimant story. Claimant narratives reinforced class differences in the United States even as they appeared to reject them. The transnational framework of Twain’s novel affords a pointed critical view revealing the latent cruelty of democracy when coupled with attitudes of exceptionalism.