Search results

Ecrite entre 1386 et 1389 pour le jeune roi français Charles VI dans une situation d'instabilité extrême causée par la guerre avec l'Angleterre et le Grand Schisme, cette oeuvre d'un clerc et juriste provençal constitue un miroir de prince très particulier. Sur la base de sources latines, les quatre livres réunissent un abrégé de l'histoire d'Israël et de l'Eglise catholique, un résumé de l'histoire des quatre royaumes de l'Antiquité et un traité sur les problèmes juridiques de la guerre. L'auteur insiste sur les conséquences dévastatrices des conflits guerriers, sociaux ou religieux. Il incite le jeune roi à exercer le pouvoir de manière juste et à rétablir la paix dans le monde chrétien. Le texte s'est répandu immédiatement parmi la noblesse, du Sud de l'Europe jusqu'en Ecosse, et principalement à Paris. Parmi les quatre-vingt-sept manuscrits conservés, celui qui sert de base à l'édition présente est le plus ancien manuscrit daté et localisé (Paris, 1397).

The focus of the present research is to reconstruct the original meaning of the culturally dense term Ved. dákṣiṇā / Pa. dakkhiṇā, which, in the late Vedic language, specifically means the gift due to the priest who officiates the rite in favour of a patron. The discussed data make it possible to postulate a com- pletely different meaning for this term in the early Vedic texts, where it is used to evoke an 'auspicious condition' prototypically proper to a successful leader, both as an effect of previous glorious deeds and as a possible cause of further prosperity. We propose that in the Vedic context this term should be translated as 'magnificence', in which we distinguish two facets, namely: a more abstract one, that is magnificence in potency, as a result of past merits and often associated to the gods' favour, and magnificence in action, i.e. the (sometimes material) outcome of such a condition. The latter may become the crucial ingredient of a simple devotional act of offering. Albeit with the expected differences, we find also in Pali sources a comparable emphasis on such an act of offering, in particular when addressed to a worthy recipient. Indeed, retrofitting the late meaning of dakṣiṇā/dakkhiṇā to the earlier cul- tural and linguistic stages leads to a miscomprehension of many relevant pas- sages and pivotal features of both Vedic and early Buddhist ancient religious and political ideology. This is why we dedicate the last part of the paper to investigating how this assumed notion of 'magnificence' matches with what we know about the most ancient Indo-Aryan societal forms and with what is assumed about the evolution of these forms. We hope in this way to be able to add a crucial element to the interpretation of the cultural dynamic at work between the Buddhist and Vedic cultures, a dynamic characterised by some unresolved tensions such as preservation versus innovation and identity con- struction versus syncretic strategies.