The author wishes to acknowledge gratefully the help of J.-L. Engel, Eugéne Courtade, Anthony J. Steinhoff, Rosemary Wakeman, and Alain Saint-Saëns. Research was partially supported by funding from the Oklahoma Humanities Council. A brief version of this article was presented at the annual meeting of the Western Society for French History in October 1995.

1. Quoted in Certeau, Michel de, Julia, Dominique, and Revel, Jacques, Une Politique de la langue: La Révolution frangaise et les patois: L'Enquête de Grégoire (Paris: Gallimard, 1975), 11. Unless otherwise noted, all translations are my own.Google Scholar

2. Almost from the beginning of the Revolution, the French language was considered a means of unity and a sign of loyalty to the Paris regime. True, some revolutionaries believed that the nation of free and independent citizens would naturally embrace the multitude of dialects. But they were in the minority. See Ford, Caroline C., “Which Nation? Language, Identity, and Republican Politics in Post-Revolutionary France,” History of European Ideas 17 (1993): 31–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarFor a survey of work on the politics of language since the Revolution, see Vigier, Philippe, “Diffusion d'une langue nationale et résistance des patois, en France, au XIXe siècle: Quelques Réflexions sur l'état présent de la recherche historique à ce propos,” Romantisme 25–31 (1979): 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. The statistics for regions where French-related dialects (patois) are spoken, do not exhibit the same consistency as the non-French-related dialects. For a brief history of each of the linguistic minorities of France, see Stephens, Meic, Linguistic Minorities in Western Europe (Dyfed, Wales: Gomer, 1976), chap. 9.Google ScholarSimply put, France was divided linguistically into two parts. The language of the North—the langue d'Oil—prevailed, whereas the language of the South—the langue d'Oc—has survived only in places. But the langue d'Oil of the North was bounded by three regional languages—ra German dialect in Alsace-Lorraine, Flemish in the department of the Nord, and Celtic in Brittany—spoken in identical or related forms in Germany (a confederation and then an empire), the Netherlands, and areas of the British Isles, respectively. And the langue d'Oc of the South was bounded by two regional languages—Basque and Catalan—spoken also in Spain.Google Scholar

4. In 1947, Canon Fernand Boulard published a map of strong, lukewarm, and weak religious practice valid not only for the twentieth century but also for the nineteenth. For a reproduction of the map and an illuminating discussion of its importance, see Gibson, Ralph, A Social History of French Catholicism, 1789–1914 (New York: Routledge, 1989), 170–80.Google ScholarOf course, social surveys of the past two decades reveal other correlations: Herve Le Bras and Emmanuel Todd report that religious practice positively correlates with an authoritarian family structure, where children obey, marry late, and preserve family tradition. Religious practice, finally, according to Herve Le Bras, correlates positively with regional political autonomy, whether accompanied by a distinctive regional language or not. See Bras, Hervé Le and Todd, Emmanuel, L'lnvention de la France: Atlas anthropologique et politique (Paris: Le Livre de Poche, 1981), 40–44;Google ScholarLe Bras, Herve, Les Trois France (Paris: Seuil, 1986), chap. 1.Google Scholar

5. I understand “culture” to be, in the words of Clifford Geertz, “a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life.” See Geertz, Clifford, “Religion as a Cultural System,” in The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays (New York: Basic, 1973), 89.Google ScholarAccordingly, language is an essential component of this process. “Milieu” is a more generic label for social environment. I use the word in the sense of poids de milieu: the weight, the force, the effect of social environment. Here I follow the usage of Philippe Vigier in “Diffusion d'une langue nationale,” cited above in reference to the politics of language, but, in fact, a fundamental work on virtually all of the linguistic issues raised in this article.Google Scholar

6. See Peyre, Henry, La Royauté et les langues provinciales (Paris: Les Presses Modernes, 1933), chap. 3: “Politique d'Alsace et de Roussillon”;Google Scholarde Roux, Marie Marquis, Louis XIV et les provinces conquises: Artois, Alsace, Flandres, Roussillon, Franche-Comté (Paris: Les Editions de France, 1938);Google ScholarBrunot, Ferdinand, Histoire de la langue francaise: Des origines à 1900, vol. 7, La Propagation dufrancais en France jusqu'à la fin de l'ancien régime (Paris: Armand Colin, 1926). The legal basis for Louis XIV's politics was the 1539 decree of Villers-Cotterêts.Google Scholar

7. Bell, David, “Recent Works on Early Modern French National Identity,” Journal of Modern History 68 (1996): 98.Google Scholar

8. See Trudeau, Danielle, “L'Ordonnance de Villers-Cotterêts et la langue francaise: Histoire ou interprértation,” Bibliothèque d'humanisme et Renaissance 65 (1983): 461–72,Google Scholarcited in Bell, “Recent Works,” 98 n. 46.Google Scholar

9. The fundamental reference work, an assembly and analysis of virtually all of the statistics on religious practice collected in the modern era, is Boulard, Fernand, Hilaire, Yves-Marie, and Cholvy, Gérard, Matériaux pour l'histoire religieuse du peuple francais, 3 vols. (Paris: Editions du Centre nationale de la recherche scientifique, 1982–1992); these volumes will be cited hereafter as Matériaux 1, 2, or 3.Google Scholar

10. For a survey of the religious history of modern France, readers may consult Lebrun, Francois, ed., Histoire des catholiques en France: Du XVe siècle à nos jours (Paris: Hachette, 1980);Google ScholarCholvy, Gerard and Hilaire, Yves-Marie, Histoire religieuse de la France contemporaine, 3 vols. (Toulouse: Privat, 1985–1988);Google ScholarGibson, Ralph, A Social History of French Catholicism, 1789–1914 (New York: Routledge, 1989);Google Scholaror the still helpful survey originally published in the middle of this century, Dansette, Adrien, Histoire religieuse de la France contemporaine: L'Église catholique dans la mêlée politiaue et sociale (Paris: Flammarion, 1965).Google Scholar

11. This may be an even better indication of church loyalty than simple churchgoing, according to Gibson, Social History of French Catholicism, 159: “Of the acceptance—grudging or otherwise—of clerical authority, and of sacramental and individual religion, the taking of Easter communion was a fair indicator.”Google ScholarFor a study of the church-state confrontation on the language question beginning in 1890, see Coffey, Joan L., “Of Catechisms and Sermons: Church-State Relations in France, 1890–1905,” Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture 66 (1997): 54–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12. See Boulard, Fernand and Rémy, Jean, Pratique religieuse urbaine et régions culturelles (Paris: Les Éditions Ouvrieres, 1968), chap. 8.Google Scholar

13. Matériaux 2: 552–54.Google ScholarSchiltigheim, just to the north of Strasbourg, was a center of breweries and manufacturing, and had a railway depot that employed a large number of non-Alsatians. The normal relations of the Alsatian clergy with their people were thrown off-kilter—which may in itself account for the low level of churchgoing. The only indication I find in the departmental archives that all was not right in the city parish and that non-Alsatians were the problem comes from 1874, after the German takeover. There had been complaints about the cure: his attitude toward the restoration of the altar, his liberties with prayers, and lack of interest in the liturgy. The official diocesan inquiry, consisting of interviews, was aptly recorded:Google Scholar

Question: Does he hear confessions [regularly]?

Answer: Yes, but here I must reproach M. le Curé. You perhaps know that he welcomes foreigners. This year it happened that on the last Sunday of the Easter season there were many people waiting to go to confession, and among them were a number of foreigners. He was not able to hear everyone, and a dozen of his parishioners were not able to make their Easter Duty. He should not have admitted the foreigners.

Foreigners here were getting special attention from the curé. Perhaps they were less dependable and needed his ministry more than others, but at least they were in church. See Archives départementales (hereafter AD) Bas Rhin IV 494. Fonds de l'Evêché, registres: Schiltigheim; Enquête sur la situation de la paroisse de Schiltigheim suite d'une plainte contre le curé, 1874.

14. Matériaux 3: 197.

15. Matériaux 2: 183, 552–53.

16. Zind, Pierre, L'Enseignement religieux dans l'instruction primaire publique en France de 1850 à 1873 (Lyon: Centre d'Histoire du Catholicisme, 1971), 248.Google Scholar

17. Lévy, Paul, Histoire linguistique d'Alsace et de Lorraine, vol. 2, De la Revolution francaise à 1918 (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1929), 509.Google ScholarLévy does note that, during the period 1850–1870, “for the great mass of Alsatians and inhabitants of the Lorraine … the language question was a matter of indifference” (240). It would appear that they went their way speaking the German dialect without caring what the authorities did to enforce French. Lévy believed that the signing of petitions (in favor of the maintenance of German) did not count for much because people often signed to please the local curé (241).Google ScholarYet the common people did come to defend their German-speaking rights, according to Moffet, Frédéric, Psychanalyse de l'Alsace (Colmar, 1951), 71: “The Catholic populations [masses] remained as attached as Protestant populations to the German language and their regional traditions. When in 1924 the French government threatened to introduce the separation laws [lois laïques] in Alsace and suppress the teaching of German at the same time, Catholics rose up as much against the bill as the Protestants.”Google Scholar

18. On Victor Duruy, see Horvath-Peterson, Sandra, Victor Duruy and French Education: Liberal Reform in the Second Empire (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1984), chap. 4.Google ScholarDuruy was trying to offset the influence of the religious congregations in the public schools. Beginning in 1860, the French government had allowed the church considerable say in the running of the school system. On the politics of education during the Second Empire, see Maurain, Jean, La Politique ecclésiastique du Second Empire, de 1852 à 1869 (Paris: Félix Alcan, 1930), esp. 580–99, 676–85, 748–80.Google ScholarSee also the surveys of education during this period: Prost, Antoine, Histoire de l'enseignement en France, 1800–1967 (Paris: Armand Colin, 1968), 155–87;Google ScholarParias, Louis-Henri, ed., Histoire générate de l'éducation en France, vol. 3, De la Révolution à l'École républicaine (Paris: Nouvelle Librairie de France, 1981), esp. 325–47.Google Scholar

19. This vitally important survey is reproduced in Eugen Weber, Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1970–1914 (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1976), 498–501.Google Scholar

20. Horvath-Peterson, , Duruy, 106.Google Scholar

21. Cited in Horvath-Peterson, , Duruy, 105.Google Scholar

22. Frenay, E., L'École primaire dans les Pyrénées-Orientales, 1833–1914 (Perpignan: Archives départementales des Pyrénées-Orientales, Service éducatif, 1983), no. 9.Google Scholar

23. Cholvy, Gerard, “Régionalisme et clergé catholique au XIXe siècle,” in Régions et régionalisme du XVIIe siècle à nos jours, ed. Gras, Christian and Livet, Georges (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1977).Google Scholar

24. Craig, John E., Scholarship and Nation Building: The Universities of Strasbourg and Alsatian Society, 1870–1939 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 23–28.Google ScholarSee also Silverman, Dan P., Reluctant Union: Alsace-Lorraine and Imperial Germany, 1871–1918 (University Park: Penn State University Press, 1972), chap. 1.Google Scholar

25. Cholvy, Gérard, “Enseignement religieux et langues maternelles en France au XIXe siècle,” Révue des langues romanes 82 (1976): 40–41.Google Scholar

26. Wahl, Alfred, Confession et comportement dans les campagnes d'Alsace et de Bade, 1871–1939, 2 vols. (Strasbourg: Coprur, 1980).Google Scholar

27. Cholvy, Gérard, Géographie religieuse de l'Hérault contemporain (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1968).Google Scholar

28. Wahl, , Confession, 890.Google Scholar

29. Wahl, , Confession, 1252.Google Scholar

30. Cholvy, , Géographie, 421–23.Google Scholar

31. Leuilliot, Paul, L'Alsace au début du XIXe siècle: Essais d'histoire politique, économique et religieuse, 1815–1830 (Paris: S.E.V.P.N., 1960), 3: 318.Google Scholar

32. Leuilliot, , L'Alsace au début du XIXe siècle, 3: 319–20.Google Scholar

33. Archives Nationales (hereafter AN) F17 10794. This carton is part of a series running from F17 10757 through F17 10798: Mémoires, classés par académies sur “les besoins de l'instruction publique dans une commune, au triple point de vue de l'Ecole, des Elèves, et du maître,” presentés par les instituteurs au concours ouvert entre eux par arrêté du 12 décembre 1860.Google Scholar

34. See Steinhoff, Anthony J., “Protestants in Strasbourg, 1870–1914: Religion and Society in Late Nineteenth Century Europe” (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1996), chap. 7.Google Scholar

35. All of these more extended references to language and religion were from essays eliminated early on in the competition. In the dossier, à conserver, there was no mention of religion and German at all.Google Scholar

36. See Epp, René, Mgr Raess, Evêque de Strasbourg, 1842–1887 (Griesheim-sur-Souffel: Culture Alsacienne, 1979);Google Scholaralso, Epp, “De la Révolution à l'annexion,” in he Diocèse de Strasbourg, ed. Rapp, Francis (Paris: Beauchesne, 1982), 171–250.Google Scholar

37. Epp, , Raess, 170.Google ScholarErnest Hauviller wrote a veritable indictment of Raess's Germanophile maneuvers under French rule in “Mgr Raess, Evêque de Strasbourg: Un Prélat germanisateur dans l'Alsace francaise,” Revue Historique 189 (1937): 98–121.Google Scholar

38. AN F17 9147, dossier 1. Inspecteur de l'académie de Strasbourg au recteur, Strasbourg, 28 Oct. 1863.Google Scholar

39. AN F17 9147, dossier 1. Lettre de M. Boucault, officier d'Academie, Oct.-Nov. 1866.Google Scholar

40. Archives de l'Evêché de Strasbourg (hereafter AES): Registres du conseil épiscopal, reg 131, page 94. Séance du 14 octobre 1861. Pétition à Monseigneur de la part des délégués du canton de Souffelsweyersheim.Google Scholar

41. AN F17 9147. Lettre de l'abbé Bretz, aumônier du Chateau Impérial de Strasbourg, a M. Heinrich, Inspecteur des écoles primaires en résidence à Colmar, Strasbourg le 30 Octobre 1863. Not all Alsatian clergy went to the extremes of Bretz. In fact, officials in Lorraine could cite the behavior and attitudes of the Alsatian clergy as examples of a spirit of compromise not shown by the clergy of Lorraine.Google ScholarFor Lorraine, extended reports are presented in May, Gaston, La Lutte pour lefrancais en Lorraine avant 1870: Étude sur la propagation de la langue francaise dans les départments de la Meurthe et de la Moselle (Nancy: Berger-Levrault, 1912);Google Scholarand Maggiolo, Louis, Rapport présenté au Conseil départemental de la Meurthe sur la situation de l'instruction primaire pendant l'année 1861/62 (Nancy: Raybois, n.d.).Google ScholarBoth Alsace, and Lorraine, are surveyed in Wirth, J., La Langue française dans les départements de l'Est, ou des moyens et des méthodes á employer pour propager la langue nationale dans les parties de l'Alsace et de la Lorraine où l'idiome allemande est encore en usage (Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1867).Google ScholarWirth says that in Alsace, when the children have learned enough French in school, “the clergy will hasten to introduce the French catechism, as it has already done in many localities.” These model clergy believe that “the diffusion of the French language will be brought about so much the more smoothly [aisément] if—to realize this goal—one seldom goes against the ideas, the ways, the habits, and the traditions of the population” (108). However, one document from Lorraine does show a genuine pedagogical compromise. From the École Normale of the same department came a lesson plan for the teaching of French through the Lord's Prayer: “I enclose here a page in manuscript containing a sample copy of the method for learning the Lord's Prayer that I propose to make our children follow …. [The German explanations] serve as a point of departure for teaching; the teacher can abandon the German words and phrases, making use of the French words and phrases to the extent that the children assimilate them.” This method obviously makes prayer instruction—in effect, one element of catechetical instruction—the principal means across the language divide. Did the author deliberately seek to bring together the clergy (who wanted to ensure that the children experienced religion in the psychologically congenial way of the maternal language), and the government officials, teachers and others (who sought to ensure linguistic—and therefore political—loyalty to the French government)? Here the union of linguistic and religious instruction is especially intimate—beyond the use of religious examples in general schoolwork. See AN F17 9147, dossier 1. Lettre de M. Lasaule de l'Ecole normale primaire de la Moselle au Ministre de l'lnstruction publique, 11 Aug. 1869.Google Scholar

42. See Cazeaux, Louis, Essai sur la conservation de la langue allemande en Alsace (Strasbourg: Silbermann, 1867).Google ScholarFor a study of Cazeaux's ministry without, however, reference to his linguistic concerns, see Muller, Claude, “Louis Cazeaux, curé de Saint-Jean Strasbourg, 1859–1870,” Annuaire de la Société des Amis du Vieux Strasbourg 15 (1985): 33–38.Google ScholarThe Révue was founded by two priests assigned to the minor seminary of Strasbourg: Pantaléon Mury, professor of rhetoric and history from 1843 to 1866; and Alexandre Straub, professor of history from 1850 to 1867.Google ScholarStraub was also an “inspecteur” for the Société française d'archéologies for Bas-Rhin and president of the Société des monuments historiques. The Revue was essentially edited by priests for priests, and included among its writers both Louis Cazeaux and Ignace Waltzer. See Muller's, Claude exhaustive archival study of the diocese of Strasbourg, Dieu est catholique et alsacien: La Vitalité du diocèse de Strasbourg, au XIXe siècle, 1802–1914 (Strasbourg: Société d'histoire de l'Eglise d'Alsace, n.d.), 1024–26. My introduction to these issues was Paul Lévy, Histoire linguistique.Google Scholar

43. Cazeaux, , Essai, 30.Google Scholar

44. Cazeaux, Essai, 31.

45. Cazeaux, Essai, 32.

46. Cazeaux, Essai, 36.

47. Cazeaux, Essai, 37.

48. Cazeaux, Essai, 37.

49. Cazeaux, Essai, 38.

50. Cazeaux, Essai, 41.

51. Cazeaux, Essai, 42.

52. Mury, P., “Chronique: La Langue allemande et le catéchisme diocésain,” Revue catholique d'Alsace 1 (1859): 83.Google Scholar

53. The Nécrologie published by the diocese of Strasbourg states that Ignace Waltzer was born in 1808 and died in 1895. He served in a variety of pastoral appointments and was made an honorary canon of the cathedral in 1883.Google Scholar

54. Waltzer, Ignace, “La Langue allemande en Alsace,” Revue catholique d'Alsace 1 (1859): 153.Google Scholar

55. Waltzer, , “La Langue allemande,” 153.Google Scholar

56. Waltzer, , “La Langue allemande,” 155.Google Scholar

57. Waltzer, , “La Langue allemande,” 156.Google Scholar

58. Waltzer, , “La Langue allemande,” 157.Google Scholar

59. There appears to be only one reference before 1871 (when Cazeau and Waltzer were in full swing). It cited a petition to the bishops to “prevent the German language from being proscribed in the primary schools, as appears to be happening now.” In fact, this is a reference to the Souffelsweyersheim clergy. Their petition is found in AD Bas Rhin 1V504: Fonds de l'Evêché, régistre: Souffelsweyersheim; see page 10 above. No mention is made of any response to the petition. See AES Registres du conseil episcopal, reg 131, page 94. Séance du 14 octobre 1861. Pétition à Monseigneur de la part des délégués du canton de Souffelweyersheim.Google Scholar

60. AES Correspondance avec le préfet du Haut-Rhin, reg. 117, page 242, 6 Feb. 1886.Google Scholar

61. AES Correspondance avec le préfet du Haut-Rhin, 252.Google Scholar

62. See Muller, Claude, “Politique, religion et langue dans la Moselle allemande, d'après un rapport de Mgr Fleck au Pape (1887),” Archives de l'Église d'Alsace, 10/49 (1990–1991): 190–96.Google Scholar

63. Harp, Stephen L., Learning to be Loyal: Primary Schooling as Nation-Building in Alsace and Lorraine, 1850–1940 (Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1998), chaps. 3 and 4.zGoogle Scholar

64. See de Roux, Marquis, Provinces conquises, 251–64.Google ScholarThe term “Roussillon” in the Old Regime could refer to the adjoining regions of Capcir, Cerdagne, Conflent, Vallespir, les Fenouillèdes, and Roussillon proper. This territory has comprised the department of Pyrénées-Orientales since the Revolution.Google Scholar

65. Poeydavant, , “Mémoire sur la province de Roussillon,” Bulletin de la Société agricole, scientifique et littéraire du département des Pyrénées-Orientales 51 (1910): 1340,Google Scholarcited in Sahlins, Peter, Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrénées (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989), 123.Google Scholar

66. See Bernardo, Domenec and Rieu, Bernat, “Conflit linguistique et revendications culturelles en Catalogne-Nord,” Les Temps modernes, no. 324–26 (1973): 305–306.Google Scholar

67. I prefer the label “local religion” to “popular religion” for all those expressions of religious thought and sentiment that are not at the same time expressions of institutional Catholicism. The label comes from Christian, William A., Local Religion in Sixteenth-Century Spain (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981),Google Scholarbut see the essays on and bibliographies of French local religion in Plongeron, Bernard, ed., La Religion populaire: Approches historiques (Paris: Beauchesne, 1976);Google Scholarand Plongeron, Bernard and Lerou, Paule, eds., La Piété populaire en France: Répertoire bibliographique, 4 vols. (Paris: Cerf, 1984–1988).Google ScholarThe expressions “great tradition” and “little traditions” have been used by the anthropologist Milton Singer in When a Great Tradition Modernizes: An Anthropological Approach to Indian Civilization (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972).Google Scholar“Local religion” was the subject of substantial scholarly argument a generation ago when these books were published. I believe that historians today are more willing to choose a label and list the data to which they want it applied—hence my simple list in the text.Google Scholar

68. Sahlins, , Boundaries, 124.Google Scholar

69. See Tackett, Timothy, Religion, Revolution, and Regional Culture in Eighteenth-Century France: The Ecclesiastical Oath of 1791 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 350–51;Google ScholarVarry, Dominique and Muller, Claude, Hommes de Dieu et Révolution en Alsace (Turnhout: Brépols, 1993);CrossRefGoogle Scholarand Torreilles, Philippe, Histoire du clergé dans le département des Pyrénées-Orientales pendant la Révolution française (Perpignan: Charles Latrobe, 1890).Google ScholarOn July 12, 1790, the Constituant Assembly passed legislative measures providing for a democratically elected episcopate and other organizational and moral reforms. More than half of the priests, accepting these measures, took an oath of loyalty to the government. The Civil Constitution of the Clergy was condemned, however, by Pius VI, thereby rendering the so-called “Constitutional Clergy” schismatic.Google Scholar

70. McPhee, Peter, “Counter-Revolution in the Pyrénées: Spirituality, Class, and Ethnicity in the Haut-Vallespir, 1793–1794,” French History 7 (1993): 324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

71. McPhee, , “Counter-Revolution in the Pyrénées,” 325.Google Scholar

72. McPhee, , “Counter-Revolution in the Pyrénées,” 326.Google Scholar

73. McPhee, , “Counter-Revolution in the Pyrénées,” 328.Google Scholar

74. McPhee, , “Counter-Revolution in the Pyrénées,” 326.Google Scholar

75. Brunet, Michel, Le Roussillon: Une Société contre l'Etat, 1780–1820 (Toulouse: Editions Eche, 1986), 460.Google Scholar

76. Brunet, , Société contre l'Etat, 466.Google Scholar

77. Brunet, , Société contre l'Etat, 468.Google Scholar

78. AN F17 9147, dossier 1. Lettre du Recteur de l'Academie de Montpellier au Ministre de l'lnstruction publique, 31 Dec. 1866.Google Scholar

79. Citations in this and the previous paragraph are found in AN F17 10782, Montpellier, Hérault, Lozère. See note 33 above on the series to which this carton belongs. Essays from Pyrénées-Orientales are included in this carton, though there is no mention of the department in the AN inventory or on the carton label.Google Scholar

80. AN F17 10782, Montpellier, Hérault, Lozère. Pierre Imbert, instituteur d'Estagel, Canton de Latour, arrondissement de Perpignan, 31 Jan. 1861.Google ScholarThe document is printed in Frenay, L'École primaire, no. 33.Google Scholar

81. AD Pyrénées-Orientales 1V7. Letter du Monseigneur l'évêque de Perpignan au Préfet et au maire de Perpignan, 9 May 1872.Google Scholar

82. Matériaux 3: 42.Google Scholar

83. AD Pyrénées-Orientales 1V8. Lettre de Prefet au Ministre de la Justice et des cultes, 21 July 1888.Google Scholar

84. AD Pyrénées-Orientales 1V13, Mandements, lettres pastorales, circulaires de Mgr Ramadié. Lettre Pastorale de Monseigneur l'Evêque de Perpignan à l'occasion de son entrée dans son diocèse (Paris: Tolra et Haton, 1865), 5.Google Scholar

85. AD Pyrénées-Orientales 1V13. Lettre Pastorale et Mandement de Monseigneur l'Evêque de Perpignan à l'occasion de la publication d'un nouveau catechisme à l'usage de son diocèse (Perpignan: Charles Latrobe, 1868), 13–14.Google Scholar

86. AD Pyrénées-Orientales 1V13. Lettre pastorale de Monseigneur l'Evêque de Perpignan au clergé de son diocése, 9 March 1872, 6.Google Scholar

87. AD Pyrénées Orientales 1V15. Mandements, lettres pastorales, circulaires de Mgr Goussail. Lettre pastorale de Monseigneur l'Evêque de Perpignan au clergé et aux fidèles de son diocèse sur l'oeuvre des séminaires (Perpignan: Charles Latrobe, 1890), 11.Google Scholar

88. Lettre circulaire de Mgr l'Evêque de Perpignan, no. 42, 1898, cited in Cortade, Eugène, “La Langue catalane et l'église dans le diocèse d'Elne-Perpignan,” Tramontane 491–92 (1965): 211–16.Google Scholar

89. Cited in Sagnes, Jean, Le Pays Catalan (Capcir-Cerdagne-Conflent-Roussillon-Vallespir-et le Fenouillèdes) (Pau: Société nouvelle d'éditions régionales et de diffusion, 1985), 1: 732.Google Scholar

90. See Delcor, Mathias, “Les Prêtres érudits du Roussillon,” Revue d'histoire de l'Eglise de France 71 (1985): 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

91. For a discussion of this, see Bernardo, and Rieu, , “Conflit linguistique,” 318–19.Google Scholar

92. Baudrillart, Henri, Populations agricoles de la France (Paris, 1893), 3: 333,Google Scholarcited in Sahlins, , Boundaries, 264.Google Scholar

93. Sagnes, , Le Pays Catalan, 1: 730.Google Scholar

94. Sagnes, , Le fays Catalan, 1: 733–34.Google Scholar

95. Frenay, , L'École primaire, no. 9.Google Scholar

96. See Cholvy, , Confession et comportement, 421–23.Google Scholar

97. Brustein, William, The Social Origins of Political Regionalism: France, 1849–1981 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chaps. 7 and 8;Google Scholarsee Sagnes, , he Pays Catalan, 1: 732.Google Scholar