Untitled - Monoskop

THE PREVOT OF PARIS AND OFFICERS IN THE PROVINCES
ditz livres et d'amende arbitraire. Fiat le .xix. e de septembre mil cinq cens et
seize. Ruze.
It is clear from this text that the Prevot,
like the conseillers of the Parle-
ment, gave careful consideration to the contents of a book submitted for a
privilege before deciding to grant an application, particularly consulting the
'gens du roy' - here probably the king's procureur in the court of the prevote at
the Chatelet - over any text which might however remotely affect the interests
of the Crown. This book, La vie et les miracles de Saint Eusice, sounds innocent
enough, but, the saint's chief claim to fame being that he had supported King
Childebert with his prayers against the Arians, an account of his doings might
be thought of concern to the dynasty. There is on the other hand no question
of consulting any theologians.
The 'permission' element implied in the grant of a privilege was not always
made explicit even by the Prevot of Paris. The Letters Patent obtained from
the Prevot the same year by Guillaume Michel (PR 1516, 2) refer only to his
request to have a privilege in his book and to the decision to grant him the
privilege for two years. On the other hand, a request from Francois Regnault
which asked only for a privilege was granted with the addition of an explicit
permission to print it (PR 1517, 7).
The Prevot gave Galliot Du Pre a privilege for the modernised version of Le
Roman de la Rose (PR 1526, 2) only after hearing the opinion of the procureur du
roi in his court ('oy sur ce le procureur du Roy nostre sire audit Chastellet pour
et au nom dudit seigneur'). Galliot may have had to make out a special case
for his edition, for reasons which had nothing to do with the acceptability of
the contents: was there a reason for granting a privilege in it at all, seeing that
the Roman de la Rose had been in circulation both in manuscript and in print for
many years? But there may have been other grounds for the Prevot to consult
the procureur du roi as to the contents. The second part of the Roman, by Jean de
Meung, contains some very radical criticism of established institutions,
ranging from marriage to the origins of kingship. The poem's antiquity and
immense popularity gave it, in these matters,
a sort of licence. A modernised
version of it, in altering some of the wording of the traditional text, might be a
means of introducing ideas which were downright subversive. This did not
prove to be the case when Galliot's 'up-dated' version was examined.
In 1527 there was to be a case which clearly illustrated the distinction
currently made in the Prevote between permission and privilege. Jacques
Nyverd sought permission to print the Treaty of Amiens, which had just been
proclaimed in Paris, and asked for a privilege in it for eight days. The new
Lieutenant Civil, Antoine Du Bourg, readily gave permission but expressly
refused the grant of a privilege ('sans aucune prohibition aux autres
imprimeurs de povoir ce faire', PR 1527, 4). The Lieutenant may have
considered that he had shown Nyverd sufficient favour in agreeing to provide
him with an authenticated copy of the text, enabling him to be the first person