La presente tesis doctoral profundiza en la biografía de un personaje tunecino del siglo XVII: Sīdī Abū-l-Gayth al-Qashshāsh a través de la traducción y análisis de algunas partes de la obra hagiográfica titulada: Nūr al-armāsh fī manāqib Sīdī Abū-l-Gayth al-Qashshāsh. Una obra literaria única no sólo por su carácter biográfico, sino por su forma y su rareza en el contexto literario árabe magrebí del periodo moderno. Pretende, por una parte, resaltar el papel de dicho personaje, como acogedor y valedor de los moriscos que arribaron al Túnez del siglo XVII, adentrándose en las razones que movieron a este personaje a encabezar la acogida de los hispanomusulmanes. Todo ello en el contexto histórico-social de Túnez en la época citada, tanto en lo referido a los grupos vinculados con los moriscos como en el entorno del Dīwān otomano.

Le 5 juillet 1830, Husayn dey signe une reddition. Alger tombe aux mains de la puissance conquérante, et, mécaniquement, les Algériens sont dits français. Cette automaticité de la nationalité tire sa force d'un principe général du droit des gens : l'État annexant attribue sa nationalité aux sujets dont l'État annexé disparaît en tant que sujet de droit international. Cette mécanique du droit est aussi une charge narrative toute contenue dans cet énoncé : les Algériens sont français. Or, pour impérative que soit la formule, d'un strict point de vue juridique, elle n'en demeure pas moins un raccourci historique que je me propose d'examiner. L'examen de la question de la nationalité des Algériens fixés à l'étranger, principalement dans l'empire ottoman, restitue au moment 1830 son caractère premier : son indétermination. Ce déplacement de la pensée dans la migration pose la colonie comme un arbitraire narratif, cet après-coup écrasant ce moment d'indéterminations. Réinscrire les conflits de nationalité dans leurs dimensions internationales donne à voir tout ce que le droit de la nationalité a de pragmatique dans l'essai de définition de l'Algérien, sujet français. Nous interrogeons le droit et ses récits comme opérateur d'une transaction historique, et, partant tentons de mesurer l'incidence du droit sur nos historiographies. L'examen attentif de suppliques en nationalité permet alors de raconter une autre histoire, déduite non plus des énoncés élémentaires du droit mais du droit en action et en contexte. / On July 5th, 1830, Dey Husayn surrendered. Alger fell to the hands of the conquering power and, mechanically, Algerian were said to be French. This automatic granting of nationality emanated from a general principle of the law: the annexing State grants its nationality to the subjects whose State disappears as an object of international law. Such mechanics of the law also held a narrative power expressed in this statement: Algerians were French. No matter how imperious the formula was legally, it nevertheless accomplished a historical leap that I offer to re-explore. Examining the question of the nationality of Algerians established abroad, principally in the Ottoman Empire, renders to the moment of 1830 its initial dimension: that of indetermination. The intellectual displacement created by studying migration reveals the colony as a narrative arbitrary, an after-the-fact that crushes the moment of indeterminations. Re­exploring conflicts of nationality in their international dimensions reveals the pragmatic aspect of the law on nationality when it comes to defining the Algerian as a French subject. This work questions the law and its narratives as the operator of a historical transaction and it aims to explore the impact of the law on our historiographies. The careful examination of petitions for nationality allows to tell another story, a story no longer produced from elementary statements of the law, but from the law in action and in context.

The following paper analyses the similarities and differences as well as the motives and strategies of the demonstrations in Iran which occurred in 2017/2018 and since September of 2022. The findings are discussed using the Rentier State Theory. A pure comparative analysis is not made, rather a case study with the demonstrations as two components. The demonstrations that started in September 2022 is ongoing as of the writing of this paper, despite this are several findings made. Similarities are seen in the participating people between the years, as well as some recurring cities. The biggest differences are the longevity of the demonstrations despite interventions of the regime, the greater unity amongst socioeconomic groups in the ongoing demonstrations as well as the grievances of electoral frauds leading up t. The motive of 2022 is more focused on revolution instead of the reforms of 2017, these differences is however partly uncertain. The strategies were in the beginning similar, with taking of the headscarf as a more prominent action in the demonstrations of 2022. Many of the underlying grievances can be discussed via the Rentier State Theory, for example the democratic deficit and economic hardships. The details and observations are several, but the main conclusion is how the ongoing demonstrations are greater in both numbers, motives, and strategies. The theory is found useful to explain this phenomenon of instability and grievance between state and civilians.