The “modern” courts in Europe included the institutional, social, societal and cultural aspects concomitant with the political affirmation of personalities emerging, by agreement or through conflict, from communities exercising power together in order to seize authority for their own personal benefit and to develop a range of encomiastic processes for their own person. In the 15^th, 16^th and 17^th centuries, the princely courts in Europe did not confine themselves to one single paradigm. There were as many courts as there were princely houses, as many “national” types, even if some, like the Burgundian court in the 15^th century and the courts in northern and central Italy in the 15^th and 16^th centuries, proposed models and exercised influence from one end of Europe to the other, while accommodating indigenous influences.

For its three-year research programme (2017-2019), the Centre de recherche du château de Versailles has launched a research axis on “Court identities and the myth of Versailles in Europe: perception, adherence and rejection (18th-19th centuries)” and wishes to publish articles related to this subject on the Bulletin du Centre de recherche du château de Versailles.

Argument

The “modern” courts in Europe included the institutional, social, societal and cultural aspects concomitant with the political affirmation of personalities emerging, by agreement or through conflict, from communities exercising power together in order to seize authority for their own personal benefit and to develop a range of encomiastic processes for their own person. In the 15^th, 16^th and 17^th centuries, the princely courts in Europe did not confine themselves to one single paradigm. There were as many courts as there were princely houses, as many “national” types, even if some, like the Burgundian court in the 15^th century and the courts in northern and central Italy in the 15^th and 16^th centuries, proposed models and exercised influence from one end of Europe to the other, while accommodating indigenous influences. What was new was that in 18^th and 19^th century Europe the princely courts referred to a model that would become the archetype: Versailles. From the 1680s, when Louis XIV established his court at Versailles, the French court was held up as a paradigm in relation to which all the others positioned themselves. This system of reference continued throughout the 19^th century. Even when Versailles had foundered, along with Louis XIV’s legacy of absolute monarchy, in October 1789, its aura was strengthened by European monarchies, which persisted and even multiplied, continuing until their collapse in 1918.

This model has a reality in the French court as configured by Louis XIV. But this configuration falls short of the model used as a reference. Versailles is a myth - developed, certainly, by the French, but equally, if not more so, by their European competitors. A phenomenon that requires investigation: why did Versailles become a key reference, or not, for European courts? There are two parts to this question:

1. What are the elements that make up this myth? How do we define this archetypal court presented as ideal? What provided the impetus, and what were the processes through which this myth developed? This question stretches well beyond France, and should be put to all those in Europe who constructed – or not – the fantasy of Versailles.
2. How was this myth received – adopted, resisted or refused?

Research will be organised along five different lines, through which the idea of the “perfect court”, such as we find at Versailles, can be defined: organisational model, public and private areas in the residence, reigning and governing in Europe, palace and democracy, State and palace rituals.

Research themes (not exhaustive)

Article proposals can deal with one or several of the following themes and lines of enquiry:

• Researching the history and the continuity of each office relating to the court;
• the definition of the Etiquette ;
• the organisational model;
• the public and private areas in the residence;
• to reign and govern in Europe;
• palace and democracy;
• State and palace rituals.

Submission guidelines and evaluation procedures

First, article proposals (abstracts of about 5 000 characters) should be addressed to Mathieu da Vinha in French or in English. These proposals will be reviewed by the scientific committee.

If the proposals are accepted by the scientific committee, the full articles will be examined both by the latter and by two members of the Centre de recherche du château de Versailles’s peer review committee (or by external scholars appointed by the scientific or peer review committee if necessary).

Article proposals must be submitted before 30 September 2018.

Authors must send:

• Author(s)’s name and surname, institutional affiliation, email address;
• Title of the article;
• An article proposal of 5 000 characters specifying the subject and the issue of the article, the theoretical framework, methodology, sources and main bibliographical references used ;
• An abbreviated curriculum vitae.

Proposals can be submitted in the following languages: French, English, German, Italian, Spanish.

The final articles will be 40 000 characters maximum (bibliography and footnotes included).

Authors should comply with the editorial guidelines of the Bulletin du Centre de recherche du château de Versailles (in French).

Scientific committee

Scientific Director: Gérard Sabatier, Professor Emeritus of Modern History at the Université Pierre Mendès-France – Grenoble II, President of the Scientific Committee

• Antonio Alvarez-Ossorio, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid,
• Maciej Forycki, Uniwersytet Adam Mickiewicz, Poznań,
• Mark Hengerer, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich,
• Jean-Marie Le Gall, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne,
• Francine-Dominique Liechtenhan, Centre national de la recherche scientifique,
• Philip Mansel, The Society for Court Studies,
• Andrea Merlotti, Centro Studi La Venaria Reale,
• Nicolas Morales, Casa de Velázquez, Madrid,
• Thierry Sarmant, Service Historique de la Défense,
• Jonathan Spangler, Manchester Metropolitan University.