Les espaces frontaliers de l’Antiquité au XVIe siècle

Marc Suttor (dir.)

Éditeur : Artois Presses Université

Lieu d'édition : Arras

Année d'édition : 2020

Date de mise en ligne : 5 mai 2021

Collection : Histoire

ISBN électronique : 9782848325026

http://books.openedition.org

Édition imprimée

Date de publication : 1 novembre 2020

ISBN : 9782848323862

Nombre de pages : 256

Référence électronique

SUTTOR, Marc (dir.). Les espaces frontaliers de l’Antiquité au XVIe siècle. Nouvelle édition [en ligne]. Arras : Artois Presses Université, 2020 (généré le 06 mai 2021). Disponible sur Internet : <http://books.openedition.org/apu/22395>. ISBN : 9782848325026.

Ce document a été généré automatiquement le 6 mai 2021.

© Artois Presses Université, 2020

Conditions d’utilisation :
http://www.openedition.org/6540

L’intérêt de cet ouvrage consiste à confronter différents champs disciplinaires sur la notion de frontière au sens propre comme au sens figuré : frontière linguistique, religieuse, économique, sociale, géographique, culturelle, artistique, religieuse et naturellement politique. On y trouvera dès lors des contributions portant sur l’histoire, la géographie, l’histoire de l’art, l’archéologie et les religions, mais aussi des études linguistiques et culturelles. La définition et la perception de la frontière sont envisagées comme une zone de rencontres, d’échanges, de regroupements mais aussi comme une zone de confrontation ou de fracture politique, religieuse, militaire.

Marc Suttor

Marc Suttor est professeur des université en histoire médiévale à l’université d’Artois.

Sommaire

Remerciements

Abréviations

Introduction

DANS LE BASSIN MÉDITERRANÉEN ANTIQUE

Art in the Limes: Analysis of Sculpture Production in Roman Frontiers

Alejandro Cadenas González

I. Art of the frontier and Romanization

II. A new cultural reality: representation of the gods

III. Funerary art - cultural conventions of peripheral Roman societies

IV. Analysis of portraits

Un espace frontalier entre Europe et Asie : la Troade et le détroit des Dardanelles dans l’Antiquité

William Pillot

I. Frontières et identité régionales de la Troade et de l’Hellespont

II. La cité d’Ilion en Troade : identité complexe d’une communauté politique dans un espace frontalier entre Europe et Asie

Frontier and border in Greek literary texts: a lexical and conceptual survey

Federica Pezzoli et David Hernández de la Fuente

I. Some theoretical remarks

II. The Greek vocabulary of the border and the frontier

III. The boundary as the end: πέρας

IV. The border as a passage: τέρμων and τέρμα

V. The frontier: μεθόριος, ἐσχατιά and ἔρημος χώρα

EN EUROPE DU NORD

La frontière de la Meuse : le rôle d’un fleuve comme limite ou frontière de l’Antiquité à nos jours

Marc Suttor

I. Définition de la frontière

II. L’évolution historique des limites dans un contexte de « frontière-zone »

III. L’évolution historique des limites dans un contexte de « frontière-ligne »

IV. La frontière à l’époque contemporaine

Jean Buridan, la frontière et la carte : une querelle de juridiction à l’université de Paris au milieu du XIVe siècle

Antoine Destemberg

I. La discorde de 1356-1358 et la concurrence des recrutements « nationaux »

II. Distinctio et medium dividens : sémantique de la frontière

III. La représentation figurée d’un espace frontière au milieu du XIVe siècle

De nostris landimeris. Populations scandinaves et frontière linguistique en Angleterre aux IXe-XIe siècles

Arnaud Lestremau

I. La mise en place d’une frontière politique

II. La construction de la frontière linguistique

III. Distinction et intégration par le nom

DANS LE NORD-OUEST DU ROYAUME DE FRANCE ET SES MARGES AU MOYEN ÂGE

Un pays de frontière dans la guerre de Cent ans : le nord de l’Artois aux lendemains du traité de Brétigny-Calais

Jean-Baptiste Santamaria

I. Négocier et interpréter la frontière : le nord de l’Artois aux lendemains du traité de Brétigny-Calais (1360-1369)

II. Face aux grandes chevauchées : destructions et gestion domaniale d’un pays de frontière

III. Faire vivre la frontière : allégeance, identités, contrôle des populations dans l’espace audomarois de 1369 à 1382

Le Calaisis anglais de 1347 à 1558 : un territoire d’exception

Stéphane Curveiller

I. L’installation anglaise dans le Calaisis

II. Une habile gestion de la conquête

III. Le Calaisis, un « boulevard diplomatique »

Où commence l’urbain ? Où commence le rural ? Délimiter le territoire urbain à travers l’exemple de Valenciennes à la fin du Moyen Âge

Stéphanie Pirez-Huart

I. Les marqueurs du paysage

II. Différencier l’urbain du rural via le prisme juridique

III. L’urbain hors les murs de la ville

Conclusions

Pierre Schneider et Marc Suttor

Sources

Bibliographie

Auteurs

Table des illustrations, cartes, tableaux et plans

Remerciements

Les articles réunis dans le présent volume sont issus d’un colloque international organisé par le CREHS (Anne Gagey, Pierre Schneider, Marie-Odile Laforge-Charles et Stéphane Lebreton), qui s’est tenu à l’université d’Artois les 15 et 16 octobre 2014. Le grand intérêt de celui-ci a poussé plusieurs collègues à souhaiter que ces travaux soient publiés. Je tiens à remercier vivement les auteurs qui, malgré cet important retard, ont accepté de mettre à jour leur article dans ces conditions particulières. Il convient de remercier aussi Charles Giry-Deloison, directeur du CREHS, et Nathalie Cabiran, responsable de l’administration de la recherche, qui ont rendu possible la publication de ce volume. J’associe à ces remerciements la bonne volonté d’Olivier Tort, directeur de la collection « Histoire » d’Artois Presses Université, qui a en a permis la réalisation.

Abréviations

ADCO

Archives départementales de Côte-d’Or

ADN

Archives départementales du Nord

ADPdC

Archives départementales du Pas-de-Calais

AMA

Archives municipales d'Arras

AMSO

Archives municipales de Saint-Omer

AMV

Archives municipales de Valenciennes

AN

Archives Nationales

AUP

Auctarium chartularii Universitatis Parisiensis

BMV

Bibliothèque municipale de Valenciennes

CREHS

Centre de Recherche et d’Études Histoire et Sociétés

CUP

Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis

MGH

Monumenta Germaniae Historica

SS

Scriptores

Introduction

Cet ouvrage sur les espaces frontaliers de l’Antiquité à la fin du Moyen Âge permettra de faire le point sur nos connaissances à ce sujet, et ce de manière très variée. Il s’agira de mettre en relief les différences entre les concepts de limites ou de frontières au cours des siècles, d’examiner aussi le rôle joué par ces espaces dans différents domaines, tant celui des pouvoirs que celui de la culture. En ce qui concerne le bassin méditerranéen antique, cette analyse peut tout aussi bien reposer sur les artefacts retrouvés aux marges de l’Empire romain que sur la place d’Ilion – Troie entre Asie et Europe, ou encore sur le vocabulaire qui correspond à notre mot « frontière » en grec.

Les trois études qui portent sur l’Europe du Nord au Moyen Âge se penchent sur des témoignages très divers à propos de l’existence d’une limite ou d’une frontière. Cela peut être la langue ou un fleuve. Il y a tout d’abord la langue, révélatrice tant de l’origine anglo-saxonne ou norroise des populations installées en Angleterre entre le IXe et le XIe siècle que d’une limite culturelle et linguistique dans le recrutement de la nation picarde au sein de l’université de Paris. On s’intéresse aussi au rôle joué par un cours d’eau, la Meuse, révélateur d’une frontière dans ce même dossier, ainsi que, de manière plus classique, de limites entre différents pouvoirs dans un autre.

Enfin, ce sont ces mêmes pouvoirs « aux frontières » qui retiennent l’attention, au sein des territoires du nord-est du royaume de France, en Artois sous le règne de Marguerite de France, dans le Calaisis anglais, de 1347 à 1558, puis au sein de l’espace rural à l’entour de Valenciennes à la fin du Moyen Âge.

DANS LE BASSIN MÉDITERRANÉEN ANTIQUE

Art in the Limes: Analysis of Sculpture Production in Roman Frontiers

Alejandro Cadenas González

I. Art of the frontier and Romanization

The physical and geopolitical peripheral territories were changing as the Roman Empire expanded its borders, defining the line between the solum romano and the barbaricum. Newly gained territories of the Empire were mostly born from military colonies; a structured model of military expansion. The frontiers were for much time the meeting point between Roman soldiers, their commanders, the local population, migrants and traders from the outside of its borders. As the powers of Rome expanded further, each frontier, once established was no longer the frontier regions but a provincial territory. These territories were an integral space of interaction between Romans, recently conquered cultures, barbarians and groups of people beyond the frontier. Political expansion and the domination of Romans in its new provinces connected cultural, technological, religious and artistic encounters between the conquerors and the conquered. These exchanges and connections formed a pattern of influences that has been called Romanization1, a term which, as we shall see, has posed multiple problems for bettering the understanding of Roman culture.

During the first third of the 20th century, historiography understood Romanization as the process of cultural conversion to a population in the frontiers from other cultures to more advanced (specifically Roman) cultural development and the civilization as a whole. Rome being perceived as morally, culturally and technologically superior comes from classical Latin literature itself2. Somehow this idea still prevailed into early 20th century historiography - heavily Eurocentric in nature - many considered Romanization of newly conquered territories a natural process of acculturation3.

Since the 1970s the paradigm of Romanization studies has extended its understanding that Romanization of other cultures was consequence of Rome’s Imperialism, historians view this process as unfavorable to the native population. Historians often accepted a view that Romanization served as a social stratagem for local elites. An opportunity for achieving higher status and more power in the conquering Empire, subordination to Roman convention and culture could have been used by these elites as a control mechanism over the rest of the population. This historiographical perspective viewed indigenous resistance to the invading culture to be a process of “shallow Romanization”, wherein local customs continued under a Roman guise. A fundamental element of this is to understand the cultural and technological conditions prior to the arrival of the Romans.

In general, these perspectives were based on post-colonialist theory including anthropological and social paradigms developed in the latter half of the 20th century, emphasizing differences between elites and the rest of the population and the colonial relationship between the metropolis and its colonies. This relationship between metropolis and province was a series of negotiations, where material and economic benefits were obtained by Rome through the exploitation of and trade with those new lands4. These revised historiographical tendencies took less to the colonial-inclined theories from the early 20th century, and understands it to be an always evolving culture, not fixed and static.5

Here we find similarity between these two theories. They both share the fundamental premise: that the existence of a clash between two cultures, had one way or another to result with a superior civilization and the proliferation of its culture and technology. According to Gregory Duncan Woolf, this confrontation had less impact on the daily life of inhabitants in the frontier than it might once have been supposed. Woolf viewed these historiographical perspectives as problematic due to their focus on cultural identity as inextricably linked to political and social conventions. For the author, this difference in culture was for its inhabitants more practical and tangible (eg. the divide between rich and poor - or - their religious nature). New research in cultural studies and on the processes of colonization, lead us to a different conception of the complex Romanization process. This conception includes a fundamental premise, concerned with understanding the specific changes occurring in the conquered territories rather than trying to explain the process as a two-sided cultural confrontation. It is thus, neither about demonstrating that Roman culture wholly replaced the indigenous culture, nor about analyzing which indigenous customs withstood this cultural avalanche. Understanding this fascinating process as the beginnings of imperial-colonial culture, this culture engendered its own cultural rules and conventions, changing the conquerors Roman culture almost as much as that the conquered6.

With this new paradigm imperial-colonial culture is seen as a process of syncretic construction between different cultural realities that ultimately result in an entirely new identity for both cultures. Created through an exchange between the indigenous cultures of each territory, this negotiation is understood to be clearly advantageous for the colonizing society. It is irrefutable that Roman political leaders and its military presided over the indigenous citizens, however, we cannot speak of a direct replacement of one culture by another, it is a milieu of transformations in both. We can speak about the "creolization" of Roman society, a term originating in Linguistics which denotes the fusion of languages. It is also used to discuss the religious, cultural, artistic and material syncretism. In the field of American Studies, specifically on colonialization, this term describes the mix between African, European and indigenous Americans7.

From this point of view, we can say that the process of conquest and settlement by the Romans in its new lands was itself the engine driving the evolution of Roman culture and society. Expansion around the Mediterranean, the conquest of Greece, relationships with Celtic, Germanic or Parthians societies was defining the Roman Empire and reconstructing its culture. There was not an original, static and incorruptible Roman culture that imposed itself over several centuries and different cultures, but a Roman society in flux. The cultural relationship was transforming both cultures in different ways.

This new conception of Romanization - namely the creation of creole or pidgin cultures, mixing Roman and indigenous elements - entails us to study each cultural, religious and social difference throughout the various acquired territories. This new conception explicates distinct cultural groups within the expanding Roman Empire rather than a model of two clashing cultures. The methodological premise of this essay is to use analysis of period sculptures, indicating the kind of cultural fusion of different identities that evolved throughout the frontiers of the Empire.

II. A new cultural reality: representation of the gods

The Roman expansion over Gaul can be used as an example to demonstrate the process of forming new cultural identity, indicative of what happened in other territories. With the conquest of Gaul, Rome went from being a hegemonic power in the Mediterranean Sea to become an institutionalized and more complex empire. Augustus organized the administrative framework of provinces, as controlled by census. The establishment of the Romans in Gaul - from c. 50 BC until the end of 1st century AD produced many changes on the lives of the Gaul people and also to the Romans themselves and their culture.

The conquest of Gaul brought the association of different peoples and cultures under one power. The people of Gaul were not a homogeneous people, and they had local differences in artistic style. These people can be understood as part of a cultural and technological pattern known as “Peoples of the European Iron Age” but the differences between its peoples go beyond an artistic style. There were factors such as coinage (present in southern Gaul, influenced by Mediterranean cultures, and absent in the North), the construction of monumental architecture (such the large walled fortifications or oppida - a tradition extending from Bohemia and southern Germany, with regional differences in construction) or burial practices (there are remnants of ancient burials in Iron Age, differing to practices of cremation). Roman occupation represented a mixed-race new order, where each community was uniquely transformed, despite being within the technologies offered by the Romans8.

Interesting conclusions can be drawn from sculptural analysis over different regions and times throughout Romanization eg. an iconographic study of deities worshipped in Gaul offers an example of the syncretic changes of Roman and indigenous culture throughout different parts of Gaul. Celtic and Roman art were very different - Celtic art based incorporates geometric and stylized decorative shapes, whilst Greco-Roman art was mainly drawing from anthropomorphic naturalism. While the Roman pantheon is well known, the Celtic deities, as well as the German, were based on elements of nature. Gods represented the Sun, Moon, stars, day and night, however in the Druidic tradition those gods were nameless and didn‘t have concrete form. In Gaul, religious sculpture was strange, except in southerly regions where prior Mediterranean influence brought Greek and Roman stylistic models that were not used in the North9 (with some exceptions as the sculptures of Roquepertuse sanctuary in Bouches-du-Rhône).

After the annexation of the three Galliae to Roman territory in 50 BC, Celtic Druidic orders were suppressed by Roman order, favouring its own artistic style, the appearance of anthropomorphic depictions of deities, and names for gods. Many of the Roman pantheon gods were assimilated to previous Celtic deities, and they became known by composite names such as Mercurius Dumias, Grannus Apollo, Apollo Bellenus or Mars Leherennus. This is a clear example of interpretatio romana. One of the most often represented gods was Mercury, depicted in the 1st Century BC as a mature, bearded man, dressed in a tunic, pants and petaso or carrying a small bag and a ram-headed serpent10. There are many examples of representations of the god Jupiter, such as the Taranis Jupiter (found in the late eighteenth century in Le Châtelet, near the River Marne), where he is depicted carrying a beam and a wheel which are solar symbols11 (Ill. 1). There are also known many statuettes representing other mixed gods, like goddess Diana, interpreted as the Celtic goddess of Gallia Belgica Arduinna or Hercules as Ogmios.

Ill.1. Bronze, Statue de Jupiter-Taramis trouvée à la fin du XVIIIe siècle au Châtelet. Musée d'Archéologie National, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, France.

The representation of these gods shows how these Gallo-Roman gods differ from their peers in the Roman pantheon. They differ from Roman deities in form and style. Now we do not talk about Celtic gods prior to the arrival of the Romans or assimilated Roman gods of the pantheon, we speak of a cultural manifestation of this new territory. They are the product of cultural negotiation between the local populations and the Romans. This negotiation was sometimes on the side of Roman interpretatio, yet other times cultural production was similar to Celtic perspectives. This is the case for the representation of other gods that retained their primitive character. For example, the horned god Cernunnos or the horse goddess Epona. Iconographically Cernunnos is very rich and interesting as it is depicted with antlers, sitting cross-legged and in some cases is shown with three heads. These are just some of the attributes associated with the deity, and were not in every example. In any case, the animal origin of Cernunnos seems clear12, often depicted with a ram, and other times snakes are seen in representations of the version of Mercury (Ill. 2, 3). The first image shows the god with bull and ram, while the second image shows it seated with three horned heads (there are two small heads added to the side of the main head, and on the rear of the heads there are cavities which would locate two horns).

Ill.2. Apollon, Cernunnos et Mercure. Collection du Musée de Saint-Rémi de Reims, Reims, France.

Ill.3. Cernunnos. Musée d'Archéologie National, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, France.

The representation of the goddess Epona involves zoolatry, connecting the goddess’ image to the representation of horses. Despite many statues of horses, with no relationship to the divinity, several statues of the goddess can be found without a horse. It was likely Greco-Roman anthropomorphic influence that created a goddess with an individual name and a form associated to horses (Ill. 4). Their representation spread from Britain to Dacia, but it was especially prominent on the north and east of Gaul, and on Germania Superior’s edge. Even when the sculptures of Epona and Cernunnos are represented with naturalistic details, they don’t have any correlation with the Roman pantheon. It was previously thought that in the most Romanized areas of Gaul, like Narbonne, Epona was represented less due to its closeness to Celtic style - this view suggests again Romanization is a process of conquest and cultural resistance. This paper however, results in an inclination toward thinking of it as a syncretic cultural creation as the result of negotiations between the conquering society and indigenous beliefs, iconographic forms: and not that indigenous resistance was a substrate to Roman culture. The syncretic process is not spontaneous but construed, so there are differences between regions.

...