Search Results

Résumé

Cet article commence par présenter le cadre de travail de Durkheim à Paris, c’est-à-dire les deux bibliothèques de l’ENS et de la Sorbonne qu’il fréquenta de 1902 à son décès en novembre 1917. Les traces qu’il a laissées dans les registres de prêts concernent un peu moins de 200 emprunts, surtout concentrés de 1902 à 1906 (67%). L’analyse de ce corpus passe par deux étapes : d’abord, en le triant par « disciplines » ou domaines de savoirs, en se fondant sur les cotations locales de ces deux grandes bibliothèques. Ensuite, en mettant ces emprunts en relation avec leurs usages et leurs destinations probables, comme dans notre article de 2014 sur les emprunts de Bordeaux. Pendant les quatre premières années, Durkheim consulta essentiellement des documents pour son grand cours d’histoire et sociologie de l’enseignement secondaire et universitaire (paru en 1938). On trouve ensuite des emprunts peu nombreux sur la religion (cours de 1906/1907), sur le pragmatisme (1913) et l’impérialisme allemand (1914). Ces emprunts donnent à voir un Durkheim avant tout enseignant, alors que ses recherches portaient, comme on le sait, sur les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse depuis 1894.

Abstract

Thanks to an original archive, this article aims to characterize Durkheim's interventions at the Council of Professors in Bordeaux from 1887 to 1902. Frequency, tonality and above all the subjects of interest of his interventions are studied. We are able to see that he paid great attention to the students and their education (i.e. their courses, fees, grants, the problem of the predominance of Latin, proposals for reform of the competitive agrégation in philosophy) but that he was also interested in administrative subjects (modalities of attribution of new courses and new chairs, procedures of the council) and research subjects (subscriptions for the university library, life of the historical and local Annales du Midi). We finally discover that he certainly had administrative ambitions – to become the dean – ended by political circumstances (the Dreyfus Affair).

Abstract

This article presents the sociological typology of crimes developed by Durkheim for his course in criminal sociology of 1892–1893, of which a complete set of notes by his nephew and student Mauss was found among descendants in 2018. It can be broken down into four types of crimes: ataxic (theft, vagrancy), altruistic (homicide), alcoholic (blows and wounds, insults), anomic (fraudulent bankruptcy, swindling). This original typology in many ways announced the typology of suicides that would appear in 1897, and shows Durkheim's sociological theory at that time, while he was defending his thesis in 1893, at the end of that academic year. It sheds new light on the notions of regulation and integration and suggests the articulation between collective representations and social life, while Durkheim has not yet had his “revelation” (1894–1895).

Abstract

There is an immediate chronological link between Durkheim's criminology courses on crime and punishment, taught between 1892 and 1894, and his first course in religious sociology (1894–1895). Both are included in the cycles of ‘General Physics of Law and Morals’. Beyond this observation, the emphasis here is on six points that intellectually connect the two fields of study, always analyzed separately by the commentators of his work. Crime is in itself a means of revealing social solidarity, and the religion that carries it. The penalty is at the articulation between criminal law and religion. The evolution of penalty marks the progressive elimination of the religious substance of modern criminal laws. Durkheim outlines a theory of the sacred by reflecting on the respect and authority of the law. There are also suggestive digressions that link the tattoos of criminals to the institution of totemism. Finally, his typology of crimes is an opportunity to transform religion into an ‘explanatory variable’, rather than a ‘variable to be explained’.

Cet article est le récit de l’enquête menée depuis quelques années sur les lieux d’habitations de Durkheim pendant ce qu’il est convenu d’appeler sa « période bordelaise » (1887–1902), à propos de laquelle on ne sait pas grand-chose et qui concerne pourtant la moitié la plus productive de sa carrière. De rebondissements en rebondissements, cette investigation m’a amené à faire des découvertes inattendues sur des aspects inédits de sa vie privée et à remettre en cause les maigres connaissances que nous avons à ce sujet. Certains y verront des détails ou des ajustements biographiques sans conséquence, d’autres des éléments importants pour connaître le personnage toujours mystérieux qui se dissimule derrière notre « classique favori »…

This is based on research that has discovered crucial, hitherto unknown biographical information. First, I review the theories of authors who helped to generate the whole 'affair' of Durkheim's two pre-names, most often in seeing it as a way to interrogate his relation with Judaism. Next, I discuss how the issue comes with elements that are incomplete or inexact. It is then to present new evidence of Durkheim's ambivalence and changing attitude towards his first, identifiably Jewish pre-name. The census records during his time at Bordeaux show that he registered himself as 'David' in 1891 and 1896, but abandoned this and switched to 'Émile' in 1901. Accordingly, I examine possible interpretations of the change, in terms of the political context of the Dreyfus Affair, events in his family life, his institutional position, his growing reputation, and a programme of research in which he resolved on a scientific treatment of religion.

François Pizarro Noël. Du désaveu du social à la présentation nominaliste: Le mouvement de réception de Durkheim (1893-1939), Thèse de Doctorat, Université du Québec à Montréal, 2009, 500 pp, en ligne : www.archipel .ugam.ca/3116/l/D1859.pdf.

Explication Entries are in the chronological order of Durkheim’s requests, and are set out as follows: entry number; author’s surname; text’s main title; year of publication; [remarks]; catalogue number; *[number of a corresponding loan]