This introduction sets the stage for the following contributions by outlining the current state of research on the two fundamental categories that this forum brings together: the event and time. In a brief survey, we discuss the ways in which the temporality of events has been theorized across disciplines. We also present our core argument for understanding the event as a temporal focal point. In dialogue with existing approaches, we seek to develop a theoretically enriched and empirically fruitful conceptualization of the event, thus offering new perspectives to the academic historiography of events as well as to historical culture at large.

In everyday language and in historiography, influential events are commonly described as "historic" but are rarely defined from a theoretical standpoint. Discussing temporal demarcations of events by scholars-in particular William H. Sewell Jr.'s foundational study of the Storming of the Bastille-this article considers the contemporary urge to define the event's temporal boundaries to better evaluate the alleged importance of certain events in history. Rather than perpetuating the constructivist idea that any event possesses a fundamentally interpretable character, it crafts a theoretical definition of the historic event that distinguishes between its flexible fringes and its rather stable core. Fixing an event as an anchor point on the timeline of history is thus presented as a process that provokes political, social, and-last but not least-financial controversies. As this article shows with examples from the history of revolutions reaching from the late eighteenth century to the early twenty-first century, such epoch-making events are essentially shaped by their flexible beginning and ending points. Although the cores of these events remain strikingly stable, their temporal fringes become objects of highly controversial discussions.

The Mémoires de Wéber, concernant Marie-Antoinette were of central importance to the wave of memoirs of the French Revolution published during the Restoration period. Commonly attributed to Joseph Weber, Marie-Antoinette's foster brother, the Mémoires' authorship has always remained doubtful. This article discusses the text's complex origins in the London émigré community around 1800 and analyzes the process by which it became a canonic eyewitness account with its republication in 1822. In light of newly discovered sources and recent scholarly interest in the emigration and postrevolutionary period, this article reexamines the Mémoires as a case of ghostwriting revolving around royalist loyalties, public emotions, and publication strategies. Highlighting personal networks reaching from the Revolution to the emigration and into Restoration France, this article makes a case for reconsidering generational factors, long-term relations, and interpretative struggles among the eyewitnesses of the Revolution in a period when memoirs became a key element of turning the Revolution into contemporary history. Les Mémoires de Wéber, concernant Marie-Antoinette ont contribué de manière décisive à la vague des mémoires sur la Révolution française publiés pendant la Restauration. Généralement attribué à Joseph Weber, le frère de lait de Marie-Antoinette, la paternité littéraire de ce texte a pourtant toujours été douteuse. Cet article retrace les origines complexes du manuscrit au sein de la communauté d'émigrés à Londres autour de 1800. A travers l'édition de 1822, il démontre comment les Mémoires de Wéber se transformaient ensuite en témoignage oculaire canonique. Utilisant des sources jusque-là inconnues et des travaux récents sur l'émigration et la période postrévolutionnaire, nous proposons de réexaminer ces Mémoires comme un exemple de « ghostwriting » influencé par des loyautés royalistes, des émotions publiques et des stratégies de publication. En mettant l'accent sur les réseaux personnels reliant Révolution, émigration et Restauration, cet article souligne les facteurs générationnels, les relations à long terme et les combats d'interprétation parmi les témoins oculaires de la Révolution à une époque où les mémoires formaient un élément-clé de l'histoire contemporaine émergente de la Révolution française.

No abstract

Des historiens comme Reinhart Koselleck ont insisté sur le lien entre les événements révolutionnaires de la fin du xviii e siècle et une politisation du phénomène temporel autour de 1800. Cependant, relativement peu de travaux ont fait de la perception du temps suite à la Révolution française un objet de recherche à part entière. Cet article se propose d'étudier le temps vécu à travers les Mémoires des acteurs et témoins des événements. À partir d'un corpus bien connu par les contemporains du xix e siècle comme par les historiens de la Révolution, on analysera la dimension temporelle de la narration. Malgré les opinions politiques opposées des Mémorialistes, leurs récits testimoniaux sur la Révolution se ressemblent de manière parfois frappante. Ils reflètent le vécu partagé d'une « nouvelle » ère ainsi que le besoin d'opposer au désordre temporel des événements la narration linéaire.