Neste trabalho buscaremos dois objetivos. O primeiro será apresentar, de modo sistemático, os principais componentes do pensamento conservador do Império. Tomamos como referência três de seus principais expoentes: Bernardo Pereira de Vasconcelos, Paulino José Soares de Sousa, o Visconde do Uruguai e José Antônio Pimenta Bueno, o Marquês de São Vicente. A partir daí, buscaremos relacionar as proposições destes pensadores com o que acreditamos serem as suas principais influências, no caso, o pensamento político francês do período em que foram ativos. Usamos como autores centrais na discussão, Benjamin Constant, François Guizot e Alexis de Tocqueville. A partir destas duas discussões, nosso foco será então de explorar as relações entre estes autores, suas influências e a forma e conteúdo da apropriação dos modelos estrangeiros, no intuito de entender como procuraram soluções para os problemas políticos do Brasil da época. / This work has two central objectives. The first one will to present, in a systematic way, the main components of conservative thought in the Brazilian Empire. We use as a reference three of the central thinkers of the period: Bernardo Pereira de Vasconcelos, Paulino José Soares de Sousa, the Viscount of Uruguay, and José Antônio Pimenta Bueno, the Marquise of São Vicente. Then, we intend to compare the propositions of these thinkers with what we believe to be their main influences, the French political thought of the period. In this case, Benjamin Constant, François Guizot and Alexis de Tocqueville are central authors for the discussion. Having realized these analyses, our central objective will be to explore the relationship between the Brazilian authors and their supposed influences. We will search for the form and content of their use of foreign models, aiming to find solutions for the Brazilian political problems of the period.

O presente trabalho é uma reflexão sobre as origens do federalismo no Brasil do século XIX. A análise tem como escopo evidenciar a trajetória dos maiores protagonistas desse tema, pois somente com o discernimento de suas experiências é que podemos verificar seus estudos e doutrina sobre o federalismo. Assim, o presente trabalho tem como início uma breve explicação sobre o que é federalismo, depois, um estudo da realidade brasileira de 1824, passando a direcionar para o campo de investigação científica sobre Ato Adicional, Lei de Interpretação do Ato Adicional e legislação correlata. Após, um estudo sobre a vida e obra do maior expoente da sua época, em defesa da centralização do poder, o representante da ideologia conservadora, o senhor Paulino José Soares de Sousa, mais conhecido como o Visconde do Uruguai. Ainda, estudamos a vida e a obra de Tavares Bastos e seus estudos contrários a centralização exacerbada do poder, através da proposta liberal sobre o federalismo. Encerramos o trabalho com a análise da vida e obra de João de Azevedo Carneiro Maia, conforme apresentado na monografia de Mario Maia Coutinho “O Pai do Municipalismo”. Por fim, demonstramos os fundamentos federalistas ainda no Brasil Império. / The present work is a reflection on the origins of federalism in Brazil in the 19th century. The analysis is scoped to show the trajectory of the greatest protagonists of this issue, because only the discernment on their experiences is that we can verify their studies and doctrine on federalism. Thus, the present work starts with a brief explanation of what federalism is, then, a study of Brazilian reality in 1824, going to direct into the field of scientific research in the Additional Act, Interpretation law of the Additional Act and related legislation. After a study of the life and work of the greatest exponent of that time, in defense of government centralization, the representative of conservative ideology, Mr. Paulino José Soares de Sousa, better known as the Viscount of Uruguay. Still, we study the life and work of Tavares Bastos and his studies opposed to the exacerbated government centralization, within the liberal proposal on federalism. We finish the study with the analysis of the life and work of João de Azevedo Carneiro Maia, according to Mario Maia Coutinho monography "O Pai do Municipalismo". Finally, we demonstrate the federalist grounds still in Brazil Empire.

No description available.

No description available.

La noblesse du Sarladais avait la réputation d'être pléthorique et désargentée, mais ce point de vue traditionnel doit être nuancé : les nobles n'étaient nombreux que dans les villes de Sarlat, de Monpazier, et dans les vallées. Ils étaient effectivement pauvres, mais leurs lignées étaient anciennes : un partage favorable à l'aîné et l'exercice d'activités sans dérogeance pour les cadets permettaient aux uns et aux autres de se distinguer de leur environnement social. Leurs relations avec l'Etat évoluèrent : aux XVI ° et XVII ° siècles, la noblesse lutta pour son indépendance, encouragée par les La Tour d'Auvergne, dont la vicomté de Turenne était souveraine. Vers 1740, avec le déclin de cette lignée, le second ordre se soumit au monarque : il s'intégra dans ses clientèles pour le servir, et il renforça ses liens avec lui, par des unions avec de vieilles lignées d'officiers, qui faisaient de l'ancienneté un élément essentiel de l'identité nobiliaire. Bien que vaincus, les nobles envisagèrent de réformer l'Etat absolutiste, car la noblesse voulait rester maîtresse chez elle en se protégeant de la domination parisienne et bordelaise. Mais, la réforme n'était pas sans risques, car la noblesse était isolée : d'une attitude ambivalente avec la bourgeoisie, elle se heurtait à des paysans hostiles aux droits féodaux, qu'un noble pauvre ne pouvait abandonner sans perdre sa supériorité dans la paroisse. / The nobility of Sarlat region was know to be overed and penniless, but this reputation needs to be qualified : the noblemen were numerous only in Sarlat, Monpazier and the valleys. They were poor indeed, but their lineage was ancient : the sharing out was in favor of the eldest and the activities reserved to the nobility of the younger brothers allowed them to distinguish themselves from their social environment. The relationships between the nobility and the State also deserve a closer investigation : throughout the 16 th and the 17 th centuries, the nobility fought for its independence, and it's supported by La Tour d'Auvergne whose the viscountey of Turenne was sovereign. Around 1740, with the decline of this lineage, the members of the "second ordre" submitted themselves to the Monarch and joined as it's followers to serve him. Trough this, they also strengthened bonds with him through the unions of old officer lineages for whom length of service was the fundamental element of the identity nobility. Although they had been defeated, the noblemen considered that it was a necessity to reform the absolutistic State, for the nobility wanted to remain in control protecting itself from the domination of Paris and Bordeaux. Yet, the reforme included risks, for the nobility was isolated : its ties with the "bourgeoisie" were ambivalents, but they faced farmers hostile to the feudals rights which a poor nobleman could not give up on, without losing superiority within the parish.

No description available.

Laurent de Montchenu naît le 14 décembre 1726 dans le Dauphiné dans une famille de noblesse ancienne. Après ses études à Louis le Grand, il devient page de la Petite Écurie puis de la Grande Écurie de 1742 à 1745. Puis il rentre dans les gardes du corps du roi, compagnie Écossaise. Son mariage en 1763 avec Marie-Angélique de Busson de Bussy, lui apporte l’aisance financière. En 1780, il est nommé commandant en second en Vivarais, et s’installe à Tournon jusqu’en 1789. Il bénéficie de la proximité du château familial à Châteauneuf-de-Galaure. Sous les ordres de Gabriel Marie de Talleyrand Périgord dit le comte de Périgord, commandant en chef du Languedoc, il travaille aussi avec le vicomte de Cambis, commandant en second à Montpellier, qu’il remplace plusieurs fois. Il assure également le remplacement du comte de Périgord pour le retour du Parlement à Toulouse en 1788. Laurent de Montchenu reçoit l’aide précieuse du commandant particulier Jean Bruno Frévol de La Coste, et des subdélégués de l’intendance ainsi que du commandement. Sa fonction de commandant en second apparaît dans sa correspondance qui comprend plus de 3200 lettres entre 1780 et 1789, dont 800 pour les années 1788 et 1789. Cette correspondance dévoile ses différents interlocuteurs et révèle son rôle de commandant en second centré sur la vie militaire et la sûreté et sécurité publique dans la région troublée du Vivarais. En 1789, alors que Laurent de Montchenu espère une promotion avec le départ du vicomte de Cambis, le système administratif de l’Ancien Régime disparaît. Il rentre à Paris et meurt le 15 avril 1802 dans son hôtel rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré. / Laurent de Montchenu was born in the Dauphiné on 14 December 1726 to an old aristocratic family. After completeing his secondary education at Louis le Grand, he became a page boy at the Petite Écurie and then at the Grande Écurie from 1742 to 1745. His career then led him to the Scottish Ensigns. His wedding to Marie-Angélique de Busson de Bussy in 1763 ensured his financial well-being. In 1780 he was appointed second-in-command in Tournon, in the Vivarais region, a post which he kept until 1789. There he enjoyed the proximity of the Châteauneuf-de-Galaure family castle. Laurent de Montchenu was under the orders of Garbiel Marie de Talleyrand Périgord, known as Count of Périgord, who was the commander-in-chief of the Languedoc region. He worked with the Viscount of Cambis, second-in-command in Montpellier, whom he replaced several times. He stood in for the Count of Périgord to ensure the return of the Toulouse Parliament in 1788. He received precious help from Special Commander Jean Bruno Frévol de la Coste. He was also helped by the subdelegates of the Supply Corps and of the Command as well as by the constabulary. His role as second-in-command appears in his correspondence, which contains over 3200 letters for the period going from 1780 to 1789 and 800 just for the 1788-1789 period. These letters show who his various interlocutors were and describe his role as second-in-command, which revolved around military life and consisted in ensuring public safety and order in the often troubled Vivarais region. In 1789, just as Laurent de Montchenu was hoping for promotion after the departure of the Viscount of Cambis, the administrative system of the Ancien Regime disappeared. He returned to Paris and died in April 1802 in his Montchenu mansion on rue du Faubourg Saint Honoré.