Archives Nationales : ouverture du site de Pierrefitte le 21 janvier 2013

Une excellente nouvelle pour les historiens de l’époque révolutionnaire, du 19e siècle et du premier XXe siècle : le nouveau site des Archives Nationales à Pierrefitte sur Seine ouvrira bien au public à partir du 21 janvier 2013.

Adresse : 59 rue Guynemer, Pierrefitte sur Seine

Accès : Métro 13, station Saint-Denis Université.

Il accueillera entre autres les grandes séries des institutions nées après 1790 (assemblées, pouvoir exécutif, ministères dont la longue litanie des séries F). Pour les historiens des polices, signalons en particulier les sous-séries F 1 (Intérieur), F 7 (Police générale), BB (Justice).
Attention : certaines séries sont encore en cours de déménagement et ne seront pas immédiatement disponibles. Plus d’informations et une liste détaillée des cotes concernées sur le site des Archives Nationales.

Pour le plan d’accès et plus de détails, notamment sur les visites guidées et les manifestations organisées à l’occasion de l’ouverture par les Archives Nationales, rendez-vous au lien suivant (sur le site des AN) :

http://www.archivesnationales.culture.gouv.fr/chan/chan/ouverture-archives-nationales.html

Book review : On Quentin Deluermoz’s « Policiers dans la ville » : the uniformed policeman in 19th century Paris

The rise of men in blues : the uniformed policeman in 19th century Paris

Review by Vincent Denis :

 Quentin Deluermoz, Policiers dans la ville, Préface de Dominique Kalifa, Publications de la Sorbonne, Paris, 2011.

This is a fascinating book about a typical figure of the Parisian landscape, the uniformed cop. But there is more in this book than another Parisiana chromography. It is the story of a great transformation of the city itself.

 This is a book about  relating the integration of a new kind of policing, practically and symbolically, in the city of Paris. This central innovation has a starting point : in 1854, the introduction of the uniformed policeman, at a large scale, first the sergent de ville, later renamed under the Republic as the gardien de la paix. I think Quentin Deluermoz shows us one of the most important transformation in the history of police in France.

Until this date, and since the 18th century,  in Paris, police work was assured by police commissioners who basically received complaints in their neighborhood, and a large variety of ominous plaincloth officers, who were hated and despised by the population, in charge of catching thieves but also tracking clandestine illicit activities in the city and keeping an eye on political opponents. The « main-forte », the armed presence, in the streets, was the mission of paramilitary or army units, with military organization and equipment : before the French Revolution, the garde de Paris, and the elite regiment of the Gardes Françaises, and after 1789 the Garde Nationale, the gendarmes, the Garde de Paris for daily surveillance, and ultimately army regiments stationed in the city.

The introduction of this new kind of agent was a real breakthrough in a secular tradition of policing based on this triad of visible police commissioners (often familiar figures), plainclothes inspectors or spies and riflemen. These new agents were inspired by the London bobbies : although they had a military background, they were police agents, they wore a distinct uniform, and they were ligthly armed (with a saber). They were not the first visible policemen in the history of policing in Paris, since the police commissioners were highly visible, public figures, easily available at all time of the day and night in their hôtel de police or commissariat, for ages. But they were only a handful (48 exactly for a whole city, and this number remained the same until the middle of the 19th century). For the first time, there was a visible civilian police force, in the streets, in large numbers. So the subaltern police agents who had been hidden  became all the sudden very visible.

The other innovation was the introduction of the beat patrol (another Londonian feature). The book demonstrates that it meant a real change in the way the police invested the space of Paris. The beat patrol took place in a global new pattern of policing, which was based on the repeated circulation of policemen in all the areas of the city, contrasting with the more static precedent pattern, based on strong points (posts, police stations and barracks) from where patrols were regularly deployed. These two innovations, the uniform policeman and the beat patrol, gradually created a new relation between the Parisians and their police, but also a public order of a new kind.

Quentin Deluermoz carefully retraced how this new police was received by the population. At first, there was much more incomprenhension than repulsion or hostility. People seemed puzzled by this new visibility of the police. It seems there was a discordance between the change of the police structures, and the relative inertia of the political imagination about the police. There is a long tradition of suspicion and defiance against « hidden police » in Paris,  during the 18th and 19th century. This opposition between visible and invisible police in the city was structured around 1700 when police inspectors were introduced for the first time, doubling the police commissioners. This dual system was reinstated before the end of the French Revolution, and barely changed. Why this suspicion ? Police commissioners symbolized a paternalist pattern of policing, behaving more like civil magistrates. Police inspectors represented a new kind of policing, « high policing », to quote the sociologist of police Jean-Claude Brodeur. It is also related to the nature of the police of Paris, which became precociously a State police, well before the French Revolution (rather an exception in France). This system of « hidden police » was even refined in the first part of the 19th century, with undercover night patrols and so on. At the end of the Empire, and during the Commune of Paris, these traditional anxieties suddendly and brutally re-appeared, as Quentin demonstrates, with aggressions, murders and persecution of policemen, who were all the more exposed to angry mobs and neighbours that they were highly visible.

Oddly, the insurgent population and the radicals often turned towards the traditional police alternative since 1789, i.e. the Garde Nationale, a militia, or other various forms of neighborhood policing. This was rather an utopia, since theses forms of policing were not well adapted to the social division of work required by modern societies. No wonder they were short-lived.

Under the Republic, these agents became familiar figures in the Parisian landscape. Making good use of newspapers, advertisements and popular literature, Quentin Deluermoz demonstrates the progressive integration of uniformed officers in cityscape. Although there still could be tension and conflict, they acquired a vague aura of ordinariness and dull normality, symbolized by the popular image of an old, fat, cheeky police officer. The idea is that they were not fearful figures anymore, but typical elements of the city, as the new modern equipment associated to urban life (advertising posts, lamp posts etc). One can discuss the validity of the analysis of the press, popular images, advertisement and mass literature to convey an impression on the feelings associated to policemen. But this use of mass-media and commercial representations, considered as reflects of common ideas, is always combined with archival evidences. There are proofs of the circulation of these literay commonplaces on the police, turned to them by angry passers-by when they arrested them. The « faits divers », a central feature in the commercial development of popular press in the last decades of the 19th century, is carefully studied in its narrative structure. There was a shift, from efficiency to inefficiency of the police, in the relations of police action, coinciding with a period of great anxiety about delinquance and recividists. May I suggest that another indicator of public trust would have been the number of formal complaints, if such figures exist. Public trust in police institutions is correlated with the number of people addressing them to solve their problems.

Quentin Deluermoz made also an excellent use of police records, to show how the population considered the policemen. The number of complaints against policemen, the letters sent to the Prefect of Police, or the threat of sending one kept in the police records after an incident with an agent, testify in favour of a kind of empowerment of Parisians towards their police. Filling a formal complaint, keeping track of an agent by his identification number, visible on his collar, became a common tool, even in the working-class neighborhood of Belleville, and for individual of all social backgrounds. An essentiel consequence of visibility was that policemen had to behave, under the scrutiny of the neighboorhood, their colleagues, and the press. This is an important toward an increased accountability of the police.

The book insists on the gradual transformation of the policemen themselves, especially after 1880. It does no presume a fixed police structure, but rather describes a very moving, wavering reality. According to Quentin Deluermoz, during the first decades of their existence, being a policeman is not a « métier », a craft or a profession, but a mere occupation, a job without set references, that did not really exist before. Eloquently, one of his chapter about the ordinary lives of policemen, is named « lessons from the street », or « graduating from the street » (l’école de la rue). In the absence of any formalized professional training, police officers learn their job the hard way, initiated by older agents or probably try to cope with their previous experience (in the army) and the regulations provided by the police headquarters. There is a clear cut when the préfet Lépine introduced the first practical school for training policemen in the 1890’s. Strikingly, police work is more and more shaped by regulations, codes, written instructions, and a centralized command, which is still an actual feature. The beat patrol itself was replaced by other patterns of policing. Its coincidence with a reinforcement of intermediary commanding field officers (brigadiers) made me wonder whether it would be a reaction against the excessive autonomy and « discretion » of police officers on the beat patrol. By the end of the century, they became the elementary pieces of a larger urban machinery, in the ideal model of urban administration that can be read in the regulations of the préfecture .

 

By the way, the book relativizes the chronology of modern policing established by Jean-Marc Berlière, in his pioneering work on the Préfet Louis Lépine, « inventor of modern police ». This is one of the stakes of the book, as one of its starting point was to challenge the assumption of more « modern » police invented by the Third Republic. Actually, Quentin Deluermoz convincingly demonstrates that the pattern of uniform policeman and beat patrol was decisive turning point in the policing of Paris, well before the Republic. The idea of a precise date for the « birth » or the « origin » of modern police is rather an obstacle than a useful tool (and before that we should define what we mean by « modern » policing). One of the lessons of the book is to insist more on incremental transformations. The system introduced in 1854 proved to be so successful that it was rapidly re-established after its brief suppression in 1870 and during the Commune.

One of the main achievements of the book is the discussion of the transformation of public order. Policemen had to constantly negotiate to establish their authority, against what Quentin Deluermoz calls « orders of the street », meaning local, indigenous orders. He made the choice of relying on case studies, due to the lack of sufficient sources for a quantified study. It is impossible to trace down a shift from one type of public order to another one, more modern and more rational. Instead, there are gradual transformations, a kind of mutual acceptance and definition of roles between Parisians and policemen. Conflict is not inexistent, but less frequent. The development of the uniformed policeman fills a new police function, « administrative police », the equivalent to the modern « sécurité publique », which is more and more distinct from the investigation of serious crime and other specialized police tasks. Its field is definitely the street, « la voie publique ». One can try to qualify the kind of policing that is eventually implemented : it is visual, with the idea that on the public space some things must not be visible (such as vagabonds and beggars, perverts or people showing improper parts of their body). Of course, it deals with petty theft and interpersonal violence, but this emphasis on « cleaning up the streets » visually is a new feature, is promised to a bright future.

To conclude, it is not a coincidence if the introduction of the uniformed policeman was simultaneous to the physical reshaping of the city by Haussmann. The book makes a point in studying this figure which became a symbol of the city, as much as the Hausmannian avenues and boulevards.

I would like to raise two questions, incented by reading this insighfult, beautifully crafted work. In this respect, one must rethink the contribution of the police to shape and produce public space. In this history of the relation between the Parisian and their policemen, there is one essential and ominous protagonist, the streets of Paris, the morphology of the city. Police action and their interaction with the people contributed to change the uses of the streets. But how did the popular uses of the streets change over time ? How the definition of the street did change, from Haussman to Lépine ? How this kind of transformation affected police work ?

Another issue would be the policemen themselves. There is a privileged focus on the way the Parisians considered their police. The book carefully studied the institutionnalization of this group. However, I am curious about the policemen themselves. What were their interests in their tasks ? Why did they join the force ? And more important, how did they judge the surrounding society, and the various groups composing the population of Paris ? Did they share the official values emphasized by the solemn ceremonies described in the last part of the book ? The sociology of modern police forces in the US or in France insist on the conflicting values among policemen, who are not a homogeneous group. Here, Quentin Deluermoz gives some hints on the occasion of the insurrection of the Commune, when some policemen chose to remain in the insurgent city. There are other chapters to write in the history of the uniformed policeman.

Séminaire : Se soumettre ou se révolter. Seule alternative face à la police ?

Université du Québec à Montréal, séminaire « Révoltes, rébellions et révolutions. Histoire de l’Europe moderne/Histoires comparées » (Pascal Bastien)

 

Mercredi 16 janvier 2013, 18 heures

Vincent Milliot (UCBN, CRHQ UMR 6583)

« Se soumettre ou se révolter. Seule alternative face à la police ? »

 

 

 

 

 

Soutenance de thèse : « Inspirer la crainte, le respect et l’amour du public » : les inspecteurs de police parisiens, 1740-1789″

Rachel COUTURE, doctorante en co-tutelle Université de Basse-Normandie (UCBN)/ Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)

 

Directeurs de thèse : Pascal Bastien (UQAM) et Vincent Milliot (UCBN)

Soutiendra sa thèse à partir de 14h30 au département d’Histoire de l’UQAM

Pavillon J.-A. DeSève – Local DS-1950 – 320, rue Sainte-Catherine est

 

 

Vendredi 18 janvier 2013

« ‘Inspirer la crainte, le respect et l’amour du public’ :

les inspecteurs de police parisiens, 1740-1789 »

 (2 volumes, 818 p.)

 

devant un jury constitué de

 

Mme Catherine Denys, Professeur en histoire moderne. Université de Lille 3 (rapporteur extérieur)
Mr Donald Fyson, Professeur, département d’histoire. Université Laval (rapporteur extérieur)
Mr Pierre Robert, Professeur, département des sciences juridiques. Université du Québec à Montréal
Mr Pascal Bastien, Professeur, département d’histoire. Université du Québec à Montréal (Directeur de thèse)
Mr Vincent Milliot, Professeur en histoire moderne. Université de Caen Basse-Normandie (Directeur de thèse)

Résumé :



L’étude des inspecteurs de police parisiens du XVIIIe siècle est négligée par l’historiographie, hormis par quelques travaux d’histoire traditionnelle qui en dressent un sombre portrait et d’histoire sociale des années 1980 qui l’abordent indirectement. Pour répondre à cette lacune, l’enquête se consacre à la compréhension de l’organisation de leur métier à compter de 1740, moment de la refondation de la compagnie, jusqu’en 1789, celui de sa dissolution. L’intérêt d’étudier l’évolution de son fonctionnement est manifeste dans un contexte de réorganisation policière au long cours, qui s’inscrit notamment dans la foulée de la création du guet (1666) et de la lieutenance de police (1667). L’histoire sociale et administrative de cette institution est structurée autour de trois pôles d’étude pour vérifier l’hypothèse de l’approbation grandissante des inspecteurs de police après 1740 suivant leur professionnalisation.

Primo, l’approche prosopographique des 80 inspecteurs de police en service entre 1742 et 1789 relève le resserrement des exigences professionnelles au moment de l’entrée dans le métier. Secundo, la normalisation des pratiques des inspecteurs de la sûreté, regardée sous l’angle de la spécialisation policière, témoigne de la consolidation de l’exercice du métier. Ainsi, la meilleure codification du protocole de travail et la clarification de la répartition des tâches avec d’autres agents du maintien de l’ordre harmonisent les rapports de ces derniers. Tercio, les mesures de légitimation déployées par les autorités montrent non seulement l’effort de reconnaissance sociale des inspecteurs de police, mais aussi sa meilleure acceptation par la population.

Mots clés : Police, Paris, XVIIIe siècle, Inspecteur de police, Sûreté, Professionnalisation

 

 

The study of 18th century Paris police inspectors is generally neglected by historians, other than a few traditional works of history that paint a dark picture as well as works of social history dating from the 1980s that approach the subject indirectly. To address this gap, this survey seeks to elucidate the manner in which the profession was organized, beginning in 1740, when the force was reformed, until 1789, when it was dissolved. The value in studying the development of its operations becomes evident when viewed against a backdrop of the long-term reorganization of the police force, which took place with the advent of patrols (1666) and police lieutenants (1667). The institution’s social and administrative history revolves around three areas of research, which seeks to verify the hypothesis

Firstly, the prosopographic approach to 80 police inspectors in service from 1742 to 1789 stems from the tightening of job requirements implemented at the time they entered the profession. Secondly, the standardization of safety inspector practices, viewed from the perspective of police specialization, attests to the consolidation of professional practice. As a result, relations improved among law enforcement officers in general due to better codification of the work protocol and the clarification of task distribution. Thirdly, the legitimacy measures implemented by the authorities demonstrated not only the effort to improve the social recognition of police inspectors but also their greater acceptance on the part of the population.

 

Séminaire : Le temps de la police

Le temps de la police, Europe, 1750-1814

 

Université Laval, Québec, séminaire du CIEQ 

(centre interuniversitaire d’études québécoises),

Mardi 15 janvier 2013

 

 

Catherine Denys (Université de Lille 3, IRHIS UMR 8529)

 et

Vincent Milliot (Université de Caen, CRHQ UMR 6583)

 

 

            Officiers accablés de travail, esclaves des sommations incessantes liées à la préservation de la sûreté publique, ou bien, officiers adeptes d’un zèle modéré, absentéistes patentés, fainéants improductifs de profession : que fait la police ?

            Poser la question du temps de travail, de son organisation, de ses rythmes dans le cas de la police (des polices) d’Ancien Régime et du premier dix-neuvième siècle fait directement écho aux problématiques les plus récemment développées sur ce chantier, qui renvoient à l’étude des pratiques, à la lente spécialisation des tâches policières et à l’essor de formes de professionnalisation. Si une synthèse générale reste difficile pour un univers marqué par une très grande diversité de situations entre les villes, entre les corps et les institutions dotées de pouvoirs de police, un certain nombre d’observations et d’interrogations sont néanmoins possibles, dans le cas présent à travers les situations parisiennes et bruxelloises, de part et d’autre de la Révolution française.

            Conceptions doloristes du travail obligeant peut-être, on trouve un certain nombre de doléances au sujet de la surcharge de travail dont souffriraient les acteurs de la police. À l’inverse, d’autres observateurs insistent sur la médiocre assiduité et disponibilité de la police. Autre aspect de la lecture des moralistes : si la police est accablée de travail, c’est aussi parce que la grande ville devient ingérable et intrinsèquement perverse. Les deux discours contribuent sans doute à forger une image et à souligner une attente sociale : le « bon policier » se doit d’être disponible, à toute heure de la journée, et pour tous, ce qui peut supposer une évolution de la hiérarchie des tâches policières. Depuis les textes réglementaires et normatifs jusqu’aux archives de la pratique, peut-on reconstituer les formes d’organisation, les agendas et les rythmes du travail policier ?  Quels enjeux se nouent autour du temps de travail de la police ?