Collectors, Catholics, and the Commune
Heritage and Counterrevolution, 1860-1890
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8940209 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tom Stammers (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 53-87 |
| Publication date | 2014-02-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | French Historical Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0016-1071 • E-ISSN: 1527-5493 |
| Publisher | Duke University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1215/00161071-2376519 |
| OpenAlex | W2325532657 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
The violence and vandalism of 1870-71 had a profound effect on stirring the conscience of private collectors in Paris. Taking their cue from the 1790s, they scrambled to safeguard the city’s treasures, form new antiquarian associations, and indulge in forms of patriotic philanthropy. The 1870s and 1880s represent a crucial moment in the visibility of the rich collector, offering a new legitimating rhetoric for luxury consumption and marking a growing rapprochement between public service and private possessions. But under commercial pressures, these decades also witnessed a more chauvinist reaction, with fresh attempts to imagine social and ethnic restrictions on who was entitled to be a custodian of the French past. Focusing on the correspondence of bibliophile Baron Jérôme Pichon and on the memory palace of Léopold Double, this article seeks to retrieve an understanding of heritage and conservation radically distinct from the scientific and secular definitions elaborated by government agencies arising out of the French Revolution and the July Monarchy. La violence et le vandalisme de l’année terrible (1870-71) exerçaient une influence profonde sur les collectionneurs particuliers à Paris. Se rappelant l’exemple néfaste de la Révolution française, ils ont entrepris une croisade afin de sauver les trésors de la ville, ils ont créé des sociétés savantes, et ils ont manifesté leur largesse patriotique. Ces individus élaborèrent une rhétorique centrée sur la possession légitime et exclusive de ces objets. Etant souvent fortement hostiles envers l’Etat, ils se trouvèrent également à l’abri des directives de ce dernier. En analysant les collectionneurs Jérôme Pichon et Léopold Double, j’interroge la possibilité de parler d’un patrimoine « autre », d’un patrimoine privé, insolite, et contre-révolutionnaire
Art · Ethnology · Humanities · Monarchy · Political science · Politics · Possession (linguistics · Sociology · Cultural Identity and Heritage · Historical Art and Culture Studies · Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis · Law · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2018 - 2020 (3) |
| Highly cited | No |