Baris Canbaz
email: baris.canbaz@ecp.fr

Bernard Yannou
email: bernard.yannou@ecp.fr

Pierre-Alain Yvars
email: payvars@supmeca.fr

Improving Process Performance of Distributed Design Systems with Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors

In new complex product development processes, the design problem is usually distributed to multiple actors from different disciplines. Each design actor has a limited responsibility in the design system. Therefore, each design actor has limited control over design variables and performance variables. However, design actors are not isolated since their design activities are coupled. This can generate design conflicts through inconsistencies among design objectives and working procedures. When the design convergence is not controlled, inconsistencies can distort the satisfaction equilibrium between design actors. This means that if a design actor aims at satisfying only his/her local design objective, other actors having conflicting objectives will be dissatisfied. Thus, individual satisfactions diverge. The intensity of conflicts is measured with the satisfaction divergence. In this paper we define wellbeing indicators in order to control the convergence of distributed set-based design (SBD) processes. Wellbeing indicators reflect design actors' satisfaction degree of their process desires. We performed a constraint programming Monte Carlo simulation of our SBD framework with a complex design problem. We compared the results of wellbeing indicators with the results of the processes where design actors do not use wellbeing indicators. It is shown that when design actors have some means to control their convergence, the solution space converges to a solution in satisfaction equilibrium while epistemic uncertainty of the design model is reduced. Some conflicts are therefore prevented and the satisfaction divergence is reduced, leading thus to an improved design process performance.

Introduction

Collaborative design is the involvement of multiple design actors from different disciplines working together to provide necessary expertise for multi-disciplinary design problems. Distributed design can be performed for collaborative design problems, where design system is decentralized; the global problem is decomposed into sub-problems and distributed to subsystems [START_REF] Papalambros | Distributed Cooperative Systems Design[END_REF]. Subsystems are composed of design actors or design teams which may be distributed to different geographical locations and even different time zones. Each subsystem has control over some design variables that define the allocated sub-problem and performs concurrent design activities in order to satisfy local design objectives. According to Sobieszczanski-Sobieski et al. [START_REF] Sobieszczanski-Sobieski | Aerospace engineering design by systematic decomposition and multilevel optimization[END_REF] system decomposition generally happens in physical divisions between subsystems and/or disciplinary boundaries of the multi-disciplinary problem. There are important motivating factors of decomposition of the design problem and decentralization of the design system, such as complexity management, decreased development time, efficient use of disciplinary expertise and design facilities, and concurrency of design activities [START_REF] Cramer | Problem Formulation for Multidisciplinary Optimization[END_REF][START_REF] Sobieszczanski-Sobieski | Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments[END_REF][START_REF] Balling | Optimization of coupled systems -A critical overview of approaches[END_REF]. Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. 2 01/05/2013 Canbaz In the ideal case, design actors should be able to work asynchronously and generate solutions to subproblems independently. True concurrency is thus achieved, and satisfactions of subsystem objectives are maximized equally. However in reality, true concurrency is very difficult to achieve [START_REF] Lewis | Collaborative, Sequential, and Isolated Decisions in Design[END_REF], because design actors are not isolated from the other actors' activities. They are related to each other by couplings. Obtaining maximum efficiency out of the decomposition is a difficult task because of the presence of couplings among subsystems. Couplings are shared information and they can cause conflicts through inconsistencies. In a design system, inconsistencies arise at problem level and process level. At problem level, subsystems can have inconsistent perceptions to the same objects. Typically, design actors from different disciplines do not have consistent objectives, but they have conflicting objectives. At process level, design actors tend to have freedom in their working environments and to determine their design strategies for their favor. Thus, their working procedures are optimal in local for their particular sub-problems; however they may be inconsistent with other actors' working procedures and may have negative impacts on the global system solution [START_REF] Zhao | Work Structure Based Collaborative Engineering Design[END_REF].

The divergence of local objective satisfactions of subsystems is the measure of how one subsystem is satisfied more than another. When design objectives of subsystems are not satisfied in equilibrium, such as one subsystem is satisfied causing dissatisfaction to the other, design conflicts arise among subsystems. The divergence represents thus the intensity of design conflicts. In the ideal case where all subsystems are fully satisfied, divergence is equal to zero. Divergent objective satisfaction solutions show that certain participants suffered during the design process, because of not being able to perform their jobs effectively. This represents a low process performance of the design system, because it cannot be a globally satisfactory solution. According to Chanron and Lewis [START_REF] Chanron | A study of convergence in decentralized design processes[END_REF], couplings also generate a challenge for allocating design variables to subsystems. If some design variables influence design performance variables of several subsystems, the allocation technique of design variables is critical, because it can influence the design quality as shown by Kim et al. [START_REF] Kim | Target Cascading in Optimal System Design[END_REF] and design process performance as shown by Park et al. [START_REF] Park | Convergence Criteria for Hierarchical Overlapping Coordination of Linearly Constrained Convex Design Problems[END_REF]. In order to obtain a better performance from the design process, objective satisfaction states should converge in equilibrium. However, obtaining satisfaction equilibrium implies a challenge, because design actors do not have means to efficiently control their dissatisfaction from solutions.

Figure 1 shows a coupling pattern where the design variables (a, b) are related by a constraint but the design actors have limited control. Design actors measure performance variables (X, Y and Z). Normalized satisfactions of the local subsystem objectives are , and . The objectives of Actor 1 and Actor 2 are conflicting. When Actor 1 minimizes a, Z decreases; Actor 3 is dissatisfied. When Actor 3 maximizes b, X increases; Actor 1 is dissatisfied. The objective of Actor 2 generates uncertainty, because the design variables can be both maximized or minimized as far as the objective of Y is satisfied. Setbased design (SBD) can overcome the design uncertainty issue by representing uncertain variables with intervals and reducing intervals while collecting design information [START_REF] Malak | Multi-attribute utility analysis in setbased conceptual design[END_REF]. As represented in Fig. 1, the intervals shrink with specifications shown with dashed arrows, and converge to a point solution : , , . As seen with this example, if design actors can only control design variables, they cannot control their satisfaction and dissatisfaction. This can end with the satisfaction domination of a design actor on another: one objective is satisfied the other is dissatisfied when or . Conflicts become therefore more intense represented with the increasing divergence of actors' individual satisfaction solutions. If the convergence of SBD can be controlled efficiently, this issue can be resolved. With an efficiently controlled design process, a collaborative compromise can be obtained. Thus, satisfaction equilibrium is obtained where individual sub-problem objectives are satisfied as much as possible while their divergence is kept minimal. For the example in Fig. 1, a collaborative compromise solution : 0.5, 0.5, 0.5 can be achieved with 3 and 15. Individual satisfactions are equal, so this solution has a zero divergence.

Figure 1. Coupled design pattern

In this paper we develop control indicators for SBD, called wellbeing indicators, to provide an alternative to controlling only local variables. Wellbeing indicators are derived from performance variables with product preferences and design actors' process preferences. They allow a bottom-up design process which involves utilizing solutions to identify the values for design parameters while reducing design uncertainty [START_REF] Fathianathan | Modelling an ongoing design process utilizing topdown and bottom-up design strategies[END_REF]. They evaluate suffering of design actors during the design process, and provide a controlled convergence in SBD. The objective of this paper is to simulate the design process performance of wellbeing indicators over conventional top-down and bottom-up design approaches. In Sec.

Collaborative Design Approaches and SBD

Uncertainty representation and propagation are important issues for design quality in preliminary design [START_REF] Antonsson | Imprecision in Engineering Design[END_REF]. This is the epistemic uncertainty of what the problem variable values of the final solution emerging from the convergent design process might be. Deterministic design methods can be considered as point-based optimization approaches, because solutions are usually represented with crisp values, and trade-offs are made on point solutions. In order to achieve an optimum design, these

Performance objectives

Actor 1 [START_REF] Parsons | A HYBRID AGENT APPROACH FOR SET-BASED CONCEPTUAL SHIP DESIGN[END_REF], point-based optimization approaches usually do not reflect a practical use for the early stage design of complex products, because of the lack of uncertainty propagation ability. Set-Based Design (SBD) is an alternative approach where solutions are represented with feasible regions/intervals of variables [START_REF] Ward | Set-based concurrent engineering and Toyota[END_REF][START_REF] Sobek | Toyota's Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering[END_REF]. Variable intervals of a sub-problem define its individual solution space. Design activities are executed concurrently and the global solution space is defined by overlapping individual solution spaces of each actor. At the beginning of the design process the solution space is rather large. It is reduced by specifications defined into the model. A convergent solution is therefore obtained at the end of the process where the solution space is reduced at maximum level. Design actors do not know this solution at the initial state but they can only determine it at the end of the process. While the epistemic uncertainty is very high at the preliminary design phase, the convergence of the solution space reduces the epistemic uncertainty and provides adequate information for further design decisions. This is shown in Fig. 2 where the outer curves represent the solution space, the inner curves represent the specifications defined at the process stage considering the design information emerging from the previous stage, and dashed lines represent the convergence.

At early stages of the design process where the epistemic uncertainty is very high, making direct decisions and searching a single solution can be difficult and inefficient. The uncertainty reduction paradigm of SBD is more efficient in concurrent engineering than point-based approaches. In SBD, instead of negotiating over single solutions, design actors work on a set of alternative solutions. This provides variability of design alternatives and flexibility of modifications in the design process. SBD allows gathering design information before making decisions. If there is not reliable trade-off information concerning a design decision, the decision can be delayed to subsequent process stages where epistemic uncertainty is reduced and more reliable design information is obtained. McKenney et al. [START_REF] Mckenney | Adapting to Changes in Design Requirements Using Set-Based Design[END_REF] and Wang and Terpenny [START_REF] Terpenny | Interactive evolutionary solution synthesis in fuzzy set-based preliminary engineering design[END_REF] show that delaying certain decisions under high epistemic uncertainty can result in higher adaptability to changes at later stages of the design process. Parsons et al. [START_REF] Parsons | A HYBRID AGENT APPROACH FOR SET-BASED CONCEPTUAL SHIP DESIGN[END_REF] show also that SBD process provides robustness to design errors. If there is a mistake or a faulty decision in the process, when it is corrected, the solution space can be still wide enough to converge to a solution. Thus, in SBD less time is consumed due to a decrease of repetitive design processes and backtrackings [START_REF] Sobek | Toyota's Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering[END_REF]. [START_REF] Lottaz | Constraint-based support for negotiation in collaborative design[END_REF][START_REF] Panchal | An Interval-based Constraint Satisfaction (IBCS) Method for Decentralized, Collaborative Multifunctional Design[END_REF][START_REF] Yvars | A CSP approach for the network of product lifecycle constraints consistency in a collaborative design context[END_REF][START_REF] Yannou | Set-based design by simulation of usage scenario coverage[END_REF]. CSP is a concept that is often employed in artificial intelligence, operational research and logic programming [START_REF] Brailsford | Constraint satisfaction problems: Algorithms and applications[END_REF]. It can be applied in every domain where we look for certain solutions while taking account of many constraints, such as Conceptual Design and Production Planning. CSP is defined by three sets (V, D, C) [START_REF] Montanari | Networks of constraints: Fundamental properties and applications to picture processing[END_REF]: 5 67 , … , 7 9 : is the set of variables.

; 6< , … , < 9 : is the set of variable domains. = 6> , … , > ? : is the set of constraints. Domains (D) contain the feasible values of corresponding variables (V) that do not violate constraints (C). Constraints are either equalities or inequalities that relate variables to some values or to each other. They are conditional if the restriction requires some conditions to be fulfilled. A complete assignment of the values to the variables, which satisfies all the constraints in the CSP, is called consistent solution. The set of consistent solutions is called solution space. CP techniques perform constraint propagations, interval analysis and branch-and-prune algorithms in order to determine the solution space very quickly for any modification of the design model. CP can handle discrete variables as shown by Montanari [START_REF] Montanari | Networks of constraints: Fundamental properties and applications to picture processing[END_REF] and Mackworth [START_REF] Mackworth | Consistency in networks of relations[END_REF] or continuous variables as shown by Faltings [START_REF] Faltings | Arc-consistency for continuous variables[END_REF]. Dynamic CSP allows adding or removing constraints to the problem model when the problem is not static [START_REF] Dechter | Belief Maintenance in Dynamic Constraint Networks[END_REF]. The problem is altered with the evolving set of constraints. The problem at time stage t is @ A B@ AC , ∆E where @ AC is the problem defined at the previous stage and ∆: @ AC F @ A is the function of added constraints that maps the previous problem to the problem at stage t. Overviews of the different CSP solving techniques and its application on design problems can be found in works [START_REF] Lottaz | Constraint-based support for negotiation in collaborative design[END_REF][START_REF] Yannou | A Comparative Study of Constraint Programming Techniques Over Intervals in Preliminary Design[END_REF][START_REF] Lottaz | Increasing Understanding During Collaboration Through Advanced Representations[END_REF][START_REF] Sam-Haroud | Consistency techniques for continuous constraints[END_REF].

In SBD, domains are represented with intervals, either finite sets or real intervals. The solution space is a subset of the Cartesian product of the intervals since some elements of the Cartesian product can be infeasible considering constraints. In the preliminary design phase where uncertainty is significant, the domains are very large. Through the progress of the design process constraints representing decisions are defined into the model. At any stage of the process designers can benefit from precise and consistent representations of the remaining design space detected by domain reduction/filtering of the CP [START_REF] Brailsford | Constraint satisfaction problems: Algorithms and applications[END_REF]. The initial domains of the example shown in Fig. 1 [START_REF] Yannou | A Comparative Study of Constraint Programming Techniques Over Intervals in Preliminary Design[END_REF] demonstrate that CP techniques can compete with and outperform fuzzy methods and probabilistic methods on managing uncertainty in design. When designing under uncertainty with CP techniques, the final size of the reduced solution space relative to its initial size shows the relative degrees of freedom of the design [START_REF] Wood | A view of design theory and methodology from the standpoint of design freedom[END_REF], a measure that we further use for defining our wellbeing indicators. In collaborative design, degrees of freedom of design actors are bounded because of the couplings in the design system. Current CP approaches contribute towards SBD and include collaborative engineering. They concentrate on the identification of the consistent solutions, but generally they lack control mechanisms which could identify, prevent and resolve design conflicts.

Controlling Convergence of Distributed SBD

We define a distributed SBD framework where design actors can control their convergence while observing their wellbeing indicators. This framework is derived from our earlier studies in works [START_REF] Canbaz | A New Framework for Collaborative Set-Based Design: Application to the Design Problem of a Hollow Cylindrical Cantilever Beam[END_REF][START_REF] Canbaz | Constraint Programming Simulation of a Distributed Set-Based Design Framework with Control Indicators[END_REF]. First we define the dynamic sub-problem of a design actor and the dynamic design process in a distributed SBD system. Next satisfaction functions and wellbeing indicators are introduced.

Dynamic Sub-Problem and SBD Process

The design responsibility of a design actor is limited by its sub-problem. Figure 3 shows the dynamic subproblem of the design actor k in a distributed SBD system where the domains of problem variables at process stage t are represented with ; A . 5 J represents the set of local design variables over which the actor k has control. 5 J K is the set of design variables that are out of the actor's responsibility. Thus, the actor k can modify 5 J , while 5 J K can only be observed. Since sub-problems are coupled, some design variables can be shared and modifiable by several design actors. Design performance variables evaluate the designed product considering design objectives. The design objectives derived from the product preferences coming from the market specifications. @ J represents the set of local performance variables related directly to the responsibility of actor k , and corresponds to the local objectives. They are a function of 5 J . Global performance variable @ L which is a function of 5 J and 5 J K , evaluates the global system solution, and corresponds to the global objective shared by all design actors. Design performance variables can be derived from design variables (e.g. weight of an object) as well as a design variable can be directly a design performance variable (e.g. length of an object). The design actor makes decisions on the design model considering the design information about how the design objectives are satisfied by the design performance variables.

A set of initial constraints = M is defined at the initial state of the design model in order to ensure the feasibility of the product. A set of decision constraints = N is introduced by actor k during the design process to make decisions in order to satisfy design objectives while reducing the epistemic uncertainty. If the information for making a decision is uncertain because of the dense couplings among subproblems, the decision is delayed to a process stage where the epistemic uncertainty is reduced by preceding decisions of the same design actor or the other actors. This is a progressive process where a decision constraint generates adequate information that allows making further decisions. Thus, = N evolves through subsequent process stages. Domains of the sub-problem ; A are therefore restricted progressively at each process stage t. The sub-problem of actor k is restricted progressively also by an The dynamic design process is shown in Fig. 4. In a design process stage, there are three decisions made: D1, D2 and D3. D1 and D3 are Boolean decisions and D2 is a "how" decision. D1 determines whether the actor compromises or defines constraints. Design actors compromise when their design objectives are sufficiently satisfied. Otherwise, they define decision constraints to satisfy their objectives until they compromise. D2 determines how restrictive decision constraints are defined. After the definition of new constraints the feasibility of the design model is tested. D3 determines whether the model accepts the modification or refuses it. The model modified with a decision constraint is accepted if there is at least one feasible solution. If there is not any feasible solution after the definition of a decision constraint, then the constraint is rejected. This can lead to a potential conflict between design actors, because the rejection of the constraint can yield to unsatisfied objectives. This conflicting situation is highlighted with the dashed line in Fig. 4. Variable intervals shrink with the accepted modifications. Updated variable intervals and the acceptance or the rejection of the constraint of a design actor are emerging design information of the process stage. Design uncertainty is reduced with this information. At the subsequent design stage, actors make decisions considering the design information emerged from previous design stages. At a process stage, D1, D2 and D3 therefore depend on previous decisions.

Decisions performed at the design stage also depend on the attitudes of design actors. D1 and D2 are individual decisions and depend on how restrictive the design attitude of the processing design actor is. Design actors with more restrictive attitudes compromise at a higher satisfaction level and define more restrictive decision constraints. D3 is a collaborative attitude that depends on how the design model is restricted by all design actors at previous stages and how D2 is performed by the processing actor. If the model is restricted too much at previous stages, constraints can be rejected even if D2 is not very restrictive. If D2 is very restrictive, constraints can be rejected even if the model is not restricted too much at previous stages. D1, D2 and D3 are explained in subsequent sections.

DYNAMIC SUB-PROBLEM

; A 5 J ; A 5 J K = M

DESIGN OBJECTIVES Product Preferences

; A @ L ; A 5 J , ; A

Wellbeing Indicators

Design objectives are defined as a function of product preferences of the market. A performance variable is evaluated by preference statements to determine how its design objective is satisfied. We combine soft and hard feasibility preference functions of physical programming defined by Messac [START_REF] Messac | Physical programming -Effective optimization for computational design[END_REF]. Hard feasibility preference statements are as follows: S1: fully satisfied by a performance variable above a certain value. where JM is the satisfaction value of the design actor k by the performance variable i and 7 M is the value of the design performance variable i. Hard feasibility preferences are: JM 1 if the objective is fully satisfied, and JM 0 if the objective is fully dissatisfied. Soft feasibility preferences are the transitions between fully satisfied and fully dissatisfied states: 1 P JM P 0 . In this paper we assume that transitions are linear functions, however nonlinear transitions can be applied with the same definitions. Figure 5 represents all the different satisfaction functions derived from the preference statements listed above. We integrate piecewise constraints reflecting design performance variable preferences into the model in order to determine satisfaction states of the design actors. These piecewise constraints define additional information into the model without eliminating any part of the solution space. For example an objective of a design actor k is minimizing a performance variable i; the design actor is fully satisfied by a performance variable value below or equal to QR 1 JM and fully dissatisfied by a performance variable value above or equal to QR 2 JM . Then the piecewise constraints integrated into the model are:

If 7 M QR 1 JM , JM 1 (1)
If 7 M QR 2 JM , JM 0 (2)
If QR 1 JM S 7 M S QR 2 JM , 1 P JM P 0 (Linear) In SBD framework we obtain an interval value for performance variables because design variables are defined with intervals. The intervals are reduced through the decision constraints defined during process stages. At process stage t, performance variable i has a minimum value M A and a maximum value T M A , the interval of the performance variable i at process stage t is: U M A , T M A V. Since the performance variable is defined with an interval we obtain an interval for the satisfaction of the design actor k by the performance variable i at stage t: JM UW JM A , W JM A V where W JM A is the minimum satisfaction and W JM A is the maximum satisfaction obtained within the interval U M A , T M A V. Figure 6 represents an example. Piecewise constraints are same as above. The minimum satisfaction is obtained at point A and the maximum satisfaction is obtained between point B and QR 1 JM . During the progress while uncertainty is reduced design actors can observe the potential maximum and minimum satisfaction values from design performance variables.

Figure 6. Intervals on the satisfaction function

Design actors can assign weights to their satisfaction values obtained from individual performance variables, regarding the importance of the design performance variables for their job. This can be performed if the sub-problem is scalable. Otherwise the sub-problem should be decomposed and distributed to another design actor. In order to observe general satisfaction states of design actors, individual performance objective satisfaction values are aggregated. General satisfaction of the design actor k from the whole design model at stage t is the sum of the design actor's weighted satisfactions from all performance variables i at stage t. It is defined as an interval J +W J A , W J A ,. X JM is the weight assigned to the performance variable i by the design actor k. I is the total number of the performance variables considered by design actor k. Thus satisfaction indicators (Minimum and Maximum Satisfaction) of a design actor are calculated as following equations: The satisfaction interval of an actor converges with the progress of the model during the design process stages where more decision constraints are added into the model. Convergence is usually bilateral, because design activities are coupled and conflicting. The minimum bound of the satisfaction interval is increased by the design activities of its design actor however the maximum bound of the interval is reduced by coupled and conflicting design activities of other design actors. Thus design actors' degree of freedom is bounded. At the final stage of the design process satisfaction interval converges to a solution where Minimum and Maximum Satisfaction Indicators are approximately equal. Figure 7 explains the bilateral convergence. = ? and = 9 are the sets of constraints added to the problem by actor k increasing W J . = ? K and = 9 K are the sets of constraints added to the problem by the other design actors with conflicting objectives decreasing W J .

W J A Y X JM # W JM A Z M[ (4)
W J A Y X JM # W JM A Z M[ (5)
Y X JM Z M[ 1 \] (6)
In a coupled design system, it is typically impossible to fully satisfy all design objectives, because the convergence is bilateral. Design actors are forced to compromise at a certain satisfaction level in the design process. A design actor can define a preference about his/her satisfaction value in which he/she may compromise. This is defined by considering solution space, design uncertainty and also the other actors' degree of freedom. This preference is the compromise threshold value ^J . ^J represents the satisfaction value that design actor k wants to guarantee in the J interval. If W J A S ^J , then the design actor defines decision constraints in order to improve J considering ^J. If the minimum satisfaction of a design actor by the model reaches ^J value or passes beyond, then the design actor passes to the compromise state. In the compromise state design actors stop adding decision constraints to the model. This leaves space to the other design actors, because maximum values of their satisfaction intervals are not restricted by actors in compromise state. ^J value defines the design attitude that determines D2 in Fig. 4.

^J is a process preference of the design actor, different than product preferences. While product preferences define satisfaction functions that evaluate the feasibility satisfaction of the product, ^J values are actors' compromise desires that evaluate process satisfactions of design actors. In order to make a distinction from the design objective satisfaction J , we call the process satisfaction as "wellbeing" of design actor. As shown in Eq. ( 7), J is normalized by ^J , and this provides the wellbeing indicator of actor k X J . Figure 8 shows how X J is derived by using the example explained with Eqs. 12 01/05/2013 Canbaz (1-3) and considering that 7 M is the only performance variable measured by actor k. Wellbeing is represented with an interval X J +W X J A , W X J A , where the minimum value is the minimum wellbeing indicator and the maximum value is the maximum wellbeing Indicator. Wellbeing interval converges through the progress of the design process. If the convergent wellbeing value is larger than or equal to 1 then the design actor is in a perfect wellbeing state. The worst wellbeing state is when the value is equal to 0. The convergent X J is shown in Eq. ( 8) where <7 J C is the underachievement deviation variable, and <7 J & is the overachievement deviation variable. The process objective of actor k is to minimize <7 J C . Wellbeing states reveal if a design actor suffers because of not being able to approach to the compromise state, or if a design actor could have the freedom to perform modifications to the model and could have approached to the compromise state. We present a CSP simulation of our SBD framework. The objective is to simulate the process performance of a wellbeing controlled design scenario compared to some scenarios that represent general design practices of top-down and bottom-up design. In top-down design practice, design actors usually modify only their design variables while evaluating their performance variables. The process can be performed with modifying one design variable of an actor after one design variable of another actor or with an all-at-once approach where modifications are performed on all the design variables of an actor after all the design variables of another actor. Alternatively, with CSP techniques a bottom-up design approach can be adopted. Design actors can modify their performance variables or wellbeing indicators derived from the performance variables. We define four simulation cases which represent these scenarios. Case 1 and Case 2 represent conventional top-down design processes while Case 3 is a conventional bottom-up process and Case 4 is wellbeing controlled bottom-up design process.

X J J ^J (7)
X J G <7 J C ! <7 J & 1 (8) <7 J C , <7 J & 0 <7 J C # <7 J & 0 4 CP Simulation Process U M ` , T M `V 7 M : J O 7 M : X J J ^J a J 1 J 0 1 P J P 0 X J 0 X J P 1 1 P X J P 0 X J 1 ^J QR
Case 1: Players define decision constraints on their normalized local design variables. Each player can define maximum one constraint per iteration.

Case 2: Players define decision constraints on their normalized local design variables with an all-at-once approach.

Case 3: Players define decision constraints on their normalized performance variables. The simulation algorithm is shown in Fig. 9. For the simulation we call design actors as players and process stages as iterations. In the simulation process we used a split mechanism similar to the roundrobin strategy that loops on all the variables at process iteration [START_REF] Granvilliers | Adaptive Bisection of Numerical CSPs[END_REF]. The objective is to ensure a global system convergence where the upper value and the lower value are as close as possible for each variable interval. Intervals are reduced until a good degree of precision is obtained. We make some assumptions for players defining decision constraints:

• If W J
A S ^J , each player k can define (a) decision constraint(s) only once at any iteration and constraints are defined sequentially. If all the players are processed in iteration then the process passes to the next iteration: t++.

• Decision constraints are defined for improving the worst case scenarios with a coefficient of restriction J P 0 or JM P 0 or Jb P 0 \], , c. This coefficient is the design attitude of player k that determines how the decision constraint is defined. This is the D3 shown in Fig. 4. Initial worst cases are larger than 0: W 5 b `P 0 \c, W @ M `P 0 \ , W X J A # 1 G JM where @ M is the normalized performance variable i, W @ M A is its minimum value at iteration t and JM is the coefficient of restriction for @ M defined by player k.

o Case 4:

X J W X J A # 1 G J .
• If a constraint is unfeasible, it is rejected. Then, its related coefficient of restriction value is reduced by half. If the coefficient of restriction value of a variable reaches a precision value (P), then the splitting is stopped for this variable, because the upper and lower bounds of its interval are as close as possible considering P. If all the coefficient of restriction values reach P, then the simulation process stops.

• ^J and J are the attitudes of players and defined before the process starts. JM and Jb values are equal to J at the initial state. Product preferences and ^J values do not change during the design process, because they represent static desires. The simulation process is evaluated by four process performance criteria: number of iterations, number of failures, global objective satisfaction and satisfaction divergence of individual solutions. Four simulation cases are compared regarding these criteria.

Number of iterations and number of failures

A smaller number of iterations represents a faster convergence and a rapid design process. The process rapidity should be evaluated with the number of failures. When a decision constraint is rejected, it is a process failure. Each failure is a potential conflict among players, because the rejection of a decision may be caused by earlier decisions of a player with a conflicting objective. Therefore, less failures means a less conflicting design convergence. The total number of failures represents the number of conflicts occurring in a design process. When there are fewer failures, the coefficient of restriction is split at later iteration, which leads to the number of iterations increasing.

Global Satisfaction and Satisfaction Divergence

Players' local objective is to minimize <7 J C in Eq. ( 8). In the ideal case, players should obtain the same J value and each X J value should be larger than 1. The satisfaction divergence is derived from the absolute differences of players' J values. All < M values calculated by Eq. ( 9) represent a vector ; < , … , < 9 . In the ideal case, all the elements of this vector is 0. The Euclidian distance of a vector solution to the ideal case solution gives the satisfaction divergence calculated by Eq. [START_REF] Park | Convergence Criteria for Hierarchical Overlapping Coordination of Linearly Constrained Convex Design Problems[END_REF]. The satisfaction divergence is a measure of conflict intensity. More divergent solutions represent more intense conflicts, because the divergence is caused by conflicting decisions. However, the satisfaction divergence cannot be evaluated alone. It is evaluated with the global objective satisfaction. The system objective is to maximize the global objective satisfaction while minimizing players' satisfaction divergence. A solution with 0 divergence is not desirable if the global objective satisfaction is 0.

< M | J ! J e | , \], ] K $ % & , ] K P ] (9)
; 7 Rf > gY < M 9 M[ (10)

Monte Carlo Simulations

We performed a Monte Carlo simulation with the design problem of a multi-clutch system derived from the example studied in [START_REF] Yannou | Parameterization and Dimensioning of the Multi-Disc Clutch in the CO4 Environment[END_REF]. Three different player characters are defined with combinations of ^J and J design attitudes as shown in Table 1. A player with a higher ^J value compromises at a larger J level. A player that starts the design process with a higher J value intends to define more restrictive decision constraints. Thus, the restrictiveness of a player is higher if ^J and J values are larger. Each of the four cases is repeated 1000 times with randomly generated player characters. The same series of random seed numbers is utilized for each case, so the simulation results of four strategies are comparable. Also design agents are randomly processed in iterations, so the process sequence is completely independent from player characters. The precision value (P) is defined as 0.001.

Simulation Problem

The simulation problem is a design problem of a multi-clutch system that connects a weight lifter with an engine, followed by a gearbox (Fig. 10). This is a complex design problem which contains 81 variables and 64 initial constraints. Problem nomenclature and constant values are given in Table 2. There are four designers associated to the problem. Their sub-problems are given in Table 3. The piecewise constraints representing product preferences are shown in Table 4. Transitions are considered linear as in Fig. 5. These define local objectives of the subsystems Player4 evaluates four design performance variable, the same weight is attributed to these performance variables:

h ∑ hM # 0.25 h M[
. The global objective is defined as:

G G G h .

Conclusions

In this paper, we proposed wellbeing indicators in a CSP processing that clearly bring significant advantages to concurrent designers when they take them into account for improving their local objective satisfactions. We performed CSP simulations of the wellbeing indicators in order to evaluate their contribution to the design process performance. The simulations are generated with Monte Carlo method where player attitudes and decision sequences are random. We compared the simulation results of a wellbeing controlled design (Case4) with three other cases: with Case1 where design actors modify only their local design variables one by one, with Case2 where design actors modify only their local design variables all-at-once and with Case3 where they modify only their performance variables. In conventional design approaches, design actors perform a "blind design process" where they usually modify their local design variables with fuzzy intentions. They cannot evaluate precisely the contribution of their modifications to their performance variables, because the epistemic uncertainty is very high. Our simulation results show that this approach generates longer process time, more conflicts and satisfaction domination of one player on another player. With the CSP approach, a bottom-up design can be adopted where design actors can modify their performance variables directly. This is a simpler approach, because it avoids allocating design variables that are shared in coupled objectives of different design actors. However this approach results in an uncontrolled convergence of the solution space where individual satisfaction solutions are divergent and satisfaction domination of a player on another one is unavoidable.

When wellbeing indicators provide design information at any stage of the design process, and they are used to define design decisions, what is considered to be better or improved under epistemic uncertainty is precisely represented. Hence, design actors can improve their states in wellbeing equilibrium while reducing epistemic uncertainty with consistent decision constraints on the solution space. Consequently, design process performances are improved compared to other approaches: some design conflicts are prevented, the satisfaction domination is largely avoided and the intensity of conflicts is reduced. However, this approach can be applied on only measurable design systems where all the design aspects can be quantified. With this approach there is still some satisfaction divergence even if there is not any obvious satisfaction domination. This is because the design actor that obtains the best satisfaction and the design actor that obtains the worst satisfaction alternate with different combinations of attitudes of the design actors. Thus average satisfaction values are similar but the results of an individual case can be divergent. This means that the results are only influenced by designer attitudes and not by the design process. However, with modifying only design variables or performance variables the results are influenced by the design process itself, because even if the designer attitudes alternate there is obvious satisfaction domination.

In future works, more definitions will be provided on modeling design attitudes and simulating different characters of design actors; such as egoistic, altruistic. Our framework is capable of determining and preventing some design conflicts but it is not capable of resolving conflicts. Further, the process strategy will be improved to enable negotiating over constraints that are already accepted and compromising accepted constraints for resolving conflicts. This requires the detection of the source of conflicts that result in divergence.

Figure

  Figure 2. Progressive convergence in SBD

Figure 3 .

 3 Figure 3. Dynamic sub-problem

  B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. 8 01/05/2013 Canbaz

Figure 4 .

 4 Figure 4. Dynamic SBD process

  S2: fully satisfied by a performance variable below a certain value. S3: fully satisfied by a performance variable equal to a certain value. S4: fully satisfied by a performance variable between certain values. S5: fully dissatisfied by a performance variable above a certain value. S6: fully dissatisfied by a performance variable below a certain value. S7: fully dissatisfied by a performance variable equal to a certain value. S8: fully dissatisfied by a performance variable between certain values. B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. 9 01/05/2013 Canbaz

Figure 5 .

 5 Figure 5. Satisfaction functions Satisfaction values of design objectives reflect product satisfactions of related design actors. With preference statements segmented satisfaction functions are defined. JM O 7 M where JM is the satisfaction value of the design actor k by the performance variable i and 7 M is the value of the design performance variable i. Hard feasibility preferences are: JM 1 if the objective is fully satisfied, and

  B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. 10 01/05/2013 Canbaz

Figure 7 .

 7 Figure 7. Bilateral convergence of satisfaction interval

  B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design.

Figure 8 .

 8 Figure 8. Derivation of wellbeing indicator

Case 4 :

 4 Players define constraints on their wellbeing indicators.

o

  `P 0 \]. If W J A ^J then the compromising player is extracted from the splitting loop (Cases 1 and 2: Jb 0 \c , Case 3: JM 0 \ , Case 4: J 0). Cases 1 and 2: 5 b W 5 b A # 1 G Jb where 5 b is the normalized design variable j, W 5 b A is its minimum value at iteration t and Jb is the coefficient of restriction for 5 b defined by player k. Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. 14 01/05/2013 Canbaz o Case 3: @ M W @ M

Figure 9

 9 Figure 9. Simulation algorithm

Figure 10 .

 10 Figure 10. Multi-clutch system

q

  Weight of engine, kg Friction value between driving and driven discs Number of revolutions of engined Thermal conductivity of chassis and shaft material Amount of friction pairs ^ Final temperature of the clutch, °C p Stiffness of chassis and shaft material @ ? Maximum allowed pressure on clutch discs Safety against stress at position 1 Safety against stress at position 2 Safety against stress at position 3 Safety of discs material against pressure J Satisfaction of player k hM Satisfaction of Player4 from performance variable i X J Wellbeing of player k

  Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design.

	3
	01/05/2013 Canbaz

Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (2013),

Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (

  2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design.

	concurrent engineering problems
	Stage 1	Stage 2	Stage 3	Stage 4	Stage 5
			PROGRESS
	2. Progressive convergence in SBD
	SBD originated as a management philosophy for concurrent engineering operations. However,
	Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) techniques can be used to adopt SBD for technical solutions of
					5
	01/05/2013 Canbaz

  This is a very effective way of representing product specifications in design systems, because it can enable design actors to define constraints directly on their design performance variables and indicators derived from the design performance variables. With its domain reduction ability CP allows modeling and propagating uncertainty on variables and reducing the uncertainty during the design progress.Yannou and Harmel Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design.

				are: ;	+1 , G∞ , ;	+1 , G∞ ,
	;	+5 , G∞ , ; '	+0.8 , G∞ and ; 4	+5 , G∞ . If a constraint is defined	10, then
	the inconsistent solutions are filtered, so the domains are reduced: ;	+10 , G∞ . The domain
	reduction due to the constraint leads to the domain reduction of related parameters: ;	+2 , G∞ ,
	;	+10, G∞ , ; '	+0.8 , G∞ and ; 4	+50 , G∞ . Domain reduction can function with a
	bottom-up architecture where constraints can be defined directly on value occurrences. For instance, if
		20 is added to the problem, the domains are reduced to: ;	+2 , 4,, ;	+10 , 20,,
	;	+5 , 20,, ; '	+0.8 , 1.6, and ; 4	+50 , 100,. 6
	01/05/2013 Canbaz

  Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. 7 01/05/2013 Canbaz evolving set of decision constraints = N K introduced by actors with couplings. With the increasing number of decision constraints introduced to the problem, the sub-problem is dynamic through the design process stages. The aggregated sub-problems propagate the dynamic design model that converges to a narrower solution space continuously.

Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (2013),

  Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design.

	1 JM	QR 2 JM
		13
	01/05/2013 Canbaz

Compromise

Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (2013),

Table 1

 1 Thus, if the Canbaz B., Yannou B., Yvars P.-A.,(2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design. # 1.001, it is extracted from the loop at iteration t. Dynamic CSP is defined in C++ computer language and a CP solver library (IBM ILOG CP[START_REF]IBM ILOG CPLEX CP Optimizer for Constraint Programs -Features and benefits[END_REF]) is used to find solutions through its domain reduction and constraint propagation algorithms. The solve function of IBM ILOG CP is used to examine the feasibility of the model, so the D3 in Fig.4is determined. If the solution of a propagated constraint returns 1, it means that the restricted model has at least one consistent solution and it is feasible. If it returns 0, it means that the model is unfeasible or the solution space is empty. Definitions of random characters

	16

A , does not contain W A

Table 2

 2 Clutch problem nomenclature & constants

	>	Space between chassis and shaft, 10 mm
	>	Thickness of chassis plate, 30 mm
		Thickness
		Width of shaft shoulder
	j	Length of shaft, 300 mm
	<	Diameter of bearing in shaft
	<	Inner diameter of driven disc
	<	Inner diameter of driving disc
	< h	Outer diameter of driven disc
	< j	Outer diameter of driving disc
	< k	Outer Diameter of chassis
	< ?	Medium diameter of friction surface
	Q	Density of chassis and shaft material
	Q	Density of disc material
	W lmnN Weight of mass to be lifted, kg
	W O	Weight of whole system (clutch + engine), kg

Table 3

 3 Clutch sub-problems

		Player1	Player2	Player3	Player4
	Performanc	W lmnN	W O	^	,	,	, q
	e Variable
	Objectives
	Design	W lmnN	W o , Q , Q , < , < h , < j , < k , , ,	, < ? , , d,		p, @
	Variable		< , <	< k , , ,
	Objectives

? 01/05/2013 Canbaz

Figure 11. Average results of multi-clutch simulations

  Yannou B., Yvars P.-A., (2013), Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors. Journal of Mechanical Design.

	92,99 151,82 Case1 Iterations 18,08 119,51 Case2 0,96 0,75 Case1 Case2 Global Objective 16,42 41,02 Case3 Failures 17,90 Case4 30,11 1,05 1,80 Case3 Case4 Canbaz B., 20 0,40 0,38 0,34 0,42 0,19 0,07 0,26 0,45 0,01 0,02 0,43 0,44 0,37 0,27 0,01 0,49 Case1 Case2 Case3 Case4 S1 S2 S3 S4 0,72 0,68 0,77 0,51 Case1 Case2 Case3 Case4 Divergence
	01/05/2013 Canbaz

Simulation Results

The average results of 1000 Monte Carlo simulations of each multi-clutch problem case are shown in Fig. 11. In order to analyze the statistical significance of the results, we performed two tailed t-tests for each pair of cases. If the significance level is considered as 0.01, all the results are statistically significant Q ! 7 s _ 0 except the iteration results of Case 2 and Case 4 Q ! 7 s 0.109 . The number of iterations and the number of failures are significantly larger when players define constraints on normalized design variables one by one (Case 1). This scenario results in the longest process time and the largest number of design conflicts. When normalized design variables are processed with the all-atonce approach (Case2), the process time and the number of conflicts decrease. However, Case 2 generates significantly more conflicts than Case 3 and Case 4. There are obvious satisfaction dominations on some players in Case1, Case2 and Case3. Here, the satisfaction domination is not character domination. It means that the design process has allowed a player to satisfy his/her local design objective significantly more, causing dissatisfaction to another player with a conflicting local objective. In Case 4, there is not an obvious domination, because players obtained closer average satisfaction values. Thus, Case 4 generates the least satisfaction divergence and the largest global satisfaction. Case


Philip Mazzei, the Pragmatic Propagandist

Francesca Genesio Aix Marseille Université, LERMA, Aix-en-Provence, France When I embarked on the fascinating project of discovering Philip Mazzei, I was presented with the four volumes of his Recherches Historiques et Politiques sur les Etats-Unis de l'Amérique Septentrionale, which constitute his most ambitious work. Written in Italian between 1785 and 1787 during Mazzei's second stay in Paris and translated into French for publication in 1788 1 , the Recherches were originally intended as a refutation of Mably's Observations sur le gouvernement et les loix des Etats-Unis d'Amérique (1784) which Mazzei had already attacked in an earlier essay criticizing the Abbé's lack of familiarity with all things American 2 . Mably had never been to America but was writing about the nascent republic's history and constitutional laws with an air of authority that Mazzei had trouble accepting. His similar criticism of Raynal's analysis of American history and institutions in his Histoire philosophique et politique des établissements et du commerce des Européens dans les deux Indes brought Mazzei to extend his refutation to the work of the second Abbot as well. The necessity of 'setting the record straight' so as to provide European readers with what he believed to be an accurate account of America's call for freedom expanded the work to include another two volumes dedicated to retracing the history of colonial America from its establishment to independence, and to discussing the state of affairs in contemporary American society by addressing a number of key issues such as paper money, national debt, commerce, immigration, slavery, the new Federal Constitution etc 3 .

As I tried to define my approach towards the study of Mazzei's work and influence, it appeared natural for me to begin with the Recherches, looking at how they relate to Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia; at how they fit in with the issue of the "Dispute of the New World" theorized by Gerbi 4 ; at how they may have contributed to explain Mazzei's vision of "republicanism", seemingly close to the spirit of "1776"; and finally at how, through them, Mazzei may have played a role in the flow of revolutionary ideas across the "Atlantic Space" as theorized by scholars like Godechot,Palmer,Bailyn,Wood and Polasky 5 .

Having advanced in my research, I find that my approach has shifted, mostly owing to the realization that while the Recherches remain Mazzei's most important work, the essence of the man and his contribution to the spread of ideas to and from America or Europe cannot be understood by focusing on the Recherches alone. This is because, more than a theorist, Mazzei was actually a propagandist, which means that the intrinsic value of any one of his writings is inferior to the cumulative worth of his lifelong undertakings to defend and promote both the American cause and his own. To say it differently, there is both more and less to Mazzei than one might initially suspect. He is at once less of an original thinker and philosopher, and more of an impressively dedicated communicator; a worker ant or spider, tirelessly spinning a web of international connections across the Atlantic and using those ties in a very practical way both to advocate the political cause he had embraced upon settling in Virginia and to further his own position as a credible businessman, revolutionary patriot, intellectual, political analyst and diplomat.

Using the prism of Mazzei as a "pragmatic propagandist", I therefore plan to widen the scope of my research to Mazzei's other writings, consisting of numerous gazette articles (often translated in different languages), of pamphlets and essays on different topics, as well as of his massive correspondence with notables on both sides of the Atlantic. In his later years, Mazzei also wrote his memoires (in Italian), providing us with an autobiographical restaging of his life that can be confronted and compared with the more immediate and piecemeal staging of his correspondence, conveniently collected and published chronologically by Margherita Marchione in the 3 volumes of her Philip Mazzei: Selected Writings and Correspondence 6 . Looking at these document, what I propose to do is offer three layers of analysis and interpretation.

The first layer focuses on Mazzei's contribution to the spread of enlightenment ideas as a "pragmatic propagandist". In this section, I will argue that Mazzei was more of an Americanist than a universalist, meaning that his efforts at propaganda were aimed at upholding the American cause at different stages of its development rather than supporting revolutionary ideology at large. This will call attention to Mazzei's preference for constitutional monarchy in Europe at the same time as he embraced a zealously republican stance in America. It will also lead me to draw a parallel with the other great "citizen of the world" of his time, Thomas Paine, whose attachment to the values advocated in his Rights of Man knew no borders or frontiers.

A second level of analysis calls attention to Mazzei's pragmatic furthering of his own position in the world. Associated with propaganda for the American cause is Mazzei's propaganda of "self", dictated by the necessity of establishing his credibility in the intellectual and diplomatic circles that his modest birth had not intended he should ever evolve in. Mazzei's daily struggle for recognition on the revolutionary stage of the Atlantic world is also a daily struggle for economic and social survival, which gives the observer a precious insight into the experience of lived modernity from the point of view of an XVIIIth century 'self-made' diplomat.

A third more tentative reading will try to look at the limits of Mazzei's successful integration into the young republic's political élite, underscoring his inability to move beyond the status of propagandist. While Mazzei's own abilities could be partly at stake, it appears from several elements of his correspondence that the Florentine may have hit a sort of nativist glass ceiling, preventing him from occupying any position of diplomatic significance because of his foreign birth and status. One could then be tempted to question the extent of the United States' commitment to the very principles of 6 Marchione's collection, cited above, is non-exhaustive, but she also compiled a more exhaustive microform edition of Mazzei's writings Margherita Marchione and Barbara Oberg, Philip Mazzei: The Comprehensive Microform Edition of His Papers, 1730-1816: Guide and Index (Millwood, N.Y.: Kraus International Publications, 1982). equality, inclusion and social mobility which people like Mazzei had ironically voiced their admiration for.

For the purpose of today's paper, I will focus on the first level of analysis, trying to define the notion of "pragmatic propagandist" and illustrate its relevance as a central narrative thread in Mazzei's life and works. I will then present my preliminary ideas for the second and third levels of analysis, for which my research is still work in progress.

The idea of presenting Mazzei as a propagandist is not new, and I certainly cannot claim ownership of it. Most scholars having dedicated some time to Mazzei have come to similar conclusions, expressed in different ways. In his book Les Révolutions, Godechot refers to Mazzei as one of the important European propagandists who, like La Fayette and Kosciusko, participated in the War of Independence, later returning to Europe to advocate the American cause 7 . In her 1965 publication Tra Riformismo Illuminato e Dispotismo Napoleonico, Sara Tognetti Burigana described Mazzei as a "knowledgeable organizer of an intense propaganda campaign in favor of the United States of America 8 ." Similarly, in the introduction to her monumental edition of Mazzei's selected writings, Margherita Marchione writes, "Propaganda written from different points of view was an important part of the prerevolutionary debate, and Mazzei's participation cannot be ignored." She later adds, "Throughout the war and the peace negotiations Mazzei was a propagandist and a pamphleteer, and his exposition and translation of American ideals for a wide European readership was a contributing factor to the success of the American cause".

As such, Mazzei is presented as being "part of [the] process" of transmission of American ideals to Europe 9 . The notion of Mazzei as a translator or interpreter of the American revolutionary experience for European audiences is also elaborated by Edoardo Tortarolo in his book Illuminismo e Rivoluzioni. Biografia politica di Filippo Mazzei. Tortarolo addresses the issue again in a recently published article entitled "Filippo Mazzei e la costruzione della memoria rivoluzionaria," in which he argues that one of Mazzei's main achievements was his hand in contributing to the multifaceted construction of the 18 th century revolutionary narrative 10 .

Mazzei's support for the American cause is strongly ideological. Having left his native Tuscany at an early age, the former Florentine physician established himself in London from 1756 to 1772, attracted by the aura of liberty supposedly guaranteed by the English constitution. If we are to believe Mazzei's retrospective autobiography, the illusion was short-lived, and Mazzei soon came to consider English society and institutions as falling short of their reputation. In considering whether to remain in England or not, Mazzei noted, "I hesitated to set up my own house because I was not certain I wanted to settle in England. I had travelled there with the idea that I would find perfect liberty, because that was the opinion people had of it in Florence, fostered also by the accounts of many English travelers (since 7 « Les européens qui prirent part à la guerre d'Indépendance se firent, à leur retour, des agents de propagande : La Fayette, Kosciusko, Filippo Mazzei, Italien établi en Virginie, plus tard chargé de mission en Toscane, puis en Pologne. » Godechot 122. 8 "…savio organizzatore d'una ntensa campagna di propaganda in favore degli Stati Uniti d'America." Sara Tognetti Burigana, Tra riformismo illuminato e dispotismo napoleonico: esperienze del « cittadino americano » Filippo Mazzei (Ed. di Storia e Letteratura, 1965) 31. My translation. 9 Marchione, xx-xxii. 10 Edoardo Tortarolo, Illuminismo e rivoluzioni biografia politica di Filippo Mazzei (Milano: F. Angeli, 1986); also Edoardo Tortarolo, "Filippo Mazzei e la costruzione della memoria rivoluzionaria," in Renato Pasta (ed.), Agli Albori delle Democrazie Moderne: Filippo Mazzei 1730-1816 (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 2018) 3-20. at the time only the wealthiest and most educated people travelled, often remaining in Florence longer than in any other part of Italy) 11 ."

Early criticism in his Memorie addresses issues such as impressment and excessive concentration of powers in the hands of the government. On the subject of impressment, Mazzei indignantly writes: "In that country, where it is said that everybody enjoys full freedom, sailors are forcefully taken from merchant ships (when war preparations are being made, and for the duration of the war) and from any other place, including from their wives' sides in their own beds, and often other people who have never been at sea are also taken 12 ." On arbitrary power and the absence of checks on the government Mazzei writes, Not long after my arrival I learnt that the government enjoyed a plurality of voices in both houses of Parliament, and I ascertained that myself by going to listen to the debates several times. This reality was so well established that the opposition party was universally known as the minority 13 .

While news of a certain Lord Ferres' sentencing to death for the murder of one of his servants convinced Mazzei to stay by proving that "personal liberty" in England was ultimately wellestablished 14 , Wilkes' eviction from parliament in 1769 persuaded him of the opposite. Wilkes, a member of parliament and journalist, openly supportive of the American cause, had written a satirical article about Lord Bute, former Prime Minister and favorite of George III's and his mother's. Excluded from participating in the next election in the Westminster constituency he had previously held, he was elected in Middlesex, where he enjoyed popular support as a radical. To Mazzei's dismay, when parliament was called into session it declared Wilkes' election null and void, depriving Middlesex citizens of their right to free representation. According to Mazzei, the tyrannical dismissal was akin to delving "a fatal blow to the solid and sacrosanct fundamental law of a free country, which is the people's perfect freedom to choose their representatives 15 ." Considering the parliament's actions as an arbitrary modification of constitutional safeguards, he commented, "There is no constitution, and it has no stable basis, if men elected to exercise ordinary legislative functions for a given time, can claim the right to cancel, or alter a fundamental law 16 ."

Mazzei's support for the American cause is therefore built largely in opposition to the British model, which the Florentine grew to despise, accusing it of being elitist, despotic and hypocritical. The 11 Mazzei, Memorie 115. 12 Mazzei, Memorie 112. My translation. "In quel paese, dove si dice che ognuno vi gode un'intiera libertà, si prendono per forza (quando si fanno I preparative per la Guerra e finché dura) I marinara dei bastimenti mercantile, e da qualunque altro luogo, spesso d'accanto alle loro mogli nel proprio letto, e non di rado anche persone, che non sonostate mai sul mare." 13 Mazzei, Memorie 116. « Non molto dopo il moi arrivo intesi che la pluralià dei voti in ambedue le camere del parlamenteo era alla disposizion del governo, e me ne assicurai essendo andato più volte a sentirne le discussioni. Questo era tanto noto, che il partito opposto si chiamava universalmente the minority, la minorità." 14 Mazzei, Memorie 116. Lord Ferres had been found guilty of the murder of one of his servants by a jury of his peers. Irrespective of class differences, he had been sentenced to death. Mazzei reflects that in any other European country, an aristocrat guilty of murdering a simple servant would have received a much lighter penalty, showing that equality of basic rights to life and liberty was better respected in Britain than elsewhere. "Riflettendo allora, che nel maggior numero degli Stati europei un gran signore, che avesse commesso l'istesso delitto sarebbe stato relegato per qualche tempo a una sua villa, ciò m'indusse a far delle riflessioni sulla libertà personale, e veddi che in Inghilterra era stabilita su basi anche più solide che in Olanda". "La libertà personale per un individuo è di molto maggior' importanza della pubblica, onde mi determinai a restare, e presi casa." 15 Mazzei, Memorie 192. My translation. "…un colpo mortale alla solida e sacrosanta legge fondamentale d'un paese libero, che è la perfetta libertà nell'elezione dei rappresentanti del popolo." 16 Mazzei, Memorie 192. The theme of the need to separate ordinary legislative from constitutive powers will be a recurrent one in Mazzei's writings. link of cause and effect is made explicit in the Memorie, where, following the narrative of the Wilkes incident, Mazzei says he resolved to move to America.

It had been some time already since my new American friends, and especially Dr. Franklin and Mr. Thomas Adams, had suggested I should go and live among them. I was worried that their government might be a bad copy of the English one, and consequently that the bases of freedom would be even looser; but both Franklin and Adams demonstrated to me that there was no aristocracy; that the people were not blinded by the splendor of the throne; that every family man could cast his vote in elections and could be elected; that they had their municipal laws; and that they had only adopted those English laws that suited them 17 .

As early as April 1772, in his correspondence with Thomas Adams, Mazzei was already referring to Virginia as "our" country 18 , despite never having set foot on the American soil. Mazzei's embracing of his American identity was therefore profoundly ideological, in a way that makes me think of De Crevecoeur's famous words: "Americans were once scattered all over Europe 19 ". There is a measure of secular predestination in these words, suggesting that not everybody in Europe had the potential of becoming American, and that those who did and felt the "calling" were attracted by the desire of participating in the experiment of building a new society, grounded in enlightenment values of liberty and equality. Mazzei's claim to American nationality rested in his wholehearted adherence to this ideal. Again quoting de Crèvecoeur, "He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds 20 ." Somewhat ironically, the statement applies more to Mazzei than to its author. De Crèvecoeur's reluctance to embrace the cause of American independence is well known. Mazzei, on the contrary, embraced it passionately and profoundly, becoming one of its most ardent naturalized advocates, both in Virginia, where he settled, and abroad.

Mazzei's promulgation of the American cause can be divided into several phases, three of which stand out most clearly as being directly linked with the different stages of the revolutionary struggle. The first phase is that of his stay in Virginia from 1773-1779, coinciding with the build-up of tensions between Britain and the Colonies and with the early years of the war. In a way, these can be seen as politically formative years for the Florentine, who -having been introduced to the cream of Virginian society by way of his commercial endeavour to introduce Italian silk, wine and olives into North America -was immersed in revolutionary talk. His friends and interlocutors included Jefferson, Madison, Washington, George Mason, John Page, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, John Bannister, John Blair, Payton and Edmund Randolph, Benjamin Harrison etc. Unsurprisingly, Mazzei's commercial and agricultural venture dwindled and his political implication grew. He was elected to local government and parish positions, where he took care of the poor. Most importantly, however, he started writing numerous essays, letters and newspaper articles promoting American independence and expressing his 17 Mazzei, Memorie 192. "Era già da tempo che i miei nuovi amici Americani, specialmente il dott. Franklin e il sig. Tommaso Adams, mi consigliavano d'andare a viver tra loro. Io dubitavo che il loro governo fosse una cattiva copia dell'inglese, e conseguentemente che le basi della libertà fossero ancora meno solide: ma tanto Franklin che Adams mi dimostrarono, che non vi era aristocrazia; che il popolo non aveva la vista abbagliata dallo splendor del trono; che ogni capo famiglia dava il voto per l'elezioni e poteva esser eletto; che avevano le loro leggi municipali; e che dalleleggi inglesi avevano adottate quelle sole, che lor convenivano." 18 Filippo Mazzei, "To Thomas Adams," 4 April 1772, document 22 of Philip Mazzei: Selected Writings and Correspondence, ed. Margherita Marchione, vol.1 (Prato: Edizioni del Palazzo, 1983) 37. 19 J. Hector St. John de Crèvecoeur, Letters from An American Farmer, ed. Warren Barton Blake (Mineola : Dover, 2005) 26. 20 Crèvecoeur, Letters 26. criticism and disavowal of everything British: from claims to sovereignty over the colonies, to affirmations of the superiority of their constitution.

Mazzei's propaganda during this first phase of the war looked both inwards and outwards, trying to mobilize support for the cause both domestically and abroad. In words very similar to Thomas Paine's, for example, Mazzei addressed his "dear fellow citizens" as follows:

In order to achieve our end … we must discuss man's natural rights and the grounds of a free government. Such a discussion will clearly show us that the British government has never been free at the peak of its perfection, and that our own was nothing more than a bad copy of it, with in addition such handicaps as to render it barely above a state of slavery.

Rather than as a theorist and a thinker, Mazzei presents himself as a "translator" or interpreter of revolutionary ideas for the benefit of the common man:

This matter has been so amply treated by several prestigious writers that I seek no other merit than that of treating it in familiar and simple forms in order to be easily understood. Practitioners of fine writing will forgive me. They need no one to write for them. I write for people who, endowed with good common sense, did not acquire book learning 21 .

Similar articles and letters were written for foreign audiences, mostly Italian, and sent to Tuscan newspapers like Notizie del Mondo and Gazzetta Universale in an early effort to counterbalance English anti-American propaganda 22 . Mazzei's desire was to influence and inform the world about the American endeavour. In sending articles about America across the ocean, Mazzei was literally translating the revolution into Italian and interpreting it for Tuscan audiences, his main target being Peter Leopold I, Grand Duke of Tuscany (Later known as Leopold II upon succeeding to Joseph II as Emperor). In 1776, Mazzei translated a copy of the Declaration of Independence and sent it to the Tuscan Gazettes, again wishing to spread the ideals of the revolution to his native country.

Mazzei's zeal in defending the American cause from Virginia earned him the opportunity of advocating it from abroad during the second phase of the war and of his efforts as a propagandist. In 1779, the sometimes self-proclaimed "citizen of the world" was entrusted with an official commission to act as Virginia's agent in Europe, with the objectives of securing a loan to support the war effort and of purchasing needed supplies for the militia. While Mazzei's diplomatic mission failed miserably owing to a series of unfavourable circumstances, his time in Europe was spent tirelessly lobbying both individuals and governments in favour of the nascent states. Again, Mazzei wrote several letters and pamphlets to that avail, addressing them to the key government figures he knew such as Peter Leopold of Tuscany, but also to those he did not know yet, such the French foreign minister, the Count de Vergennes.

The chief aims of these writings were to convince European leaders that the American states had the capacity to win the war if adequately financed and supported by foreign loans and military help. To do so, Mazzei emphasized the solidity of the American economy, in spite of temporary problems with paper money. Looking at the longer term, Mazzei was also trying to establish profitable commercial partnerships with Europe, arguing that European powers would benefit from early agreements with America that would end up supplanting traditional trading ties with England if undertaken before the war's end.

To Peter Leopold, Mazzei wrote no less than 11 letters in which he very insistently but unsuccessfully tried to influence the Grand Duke's opinion of the Anglo-American struggle in favour 21 Filippo Mazzei, "Fragments published on the principles of the American Revolution by a Citizen of VIrginia," 1774-1775, document 40 in Margherita Marchione, Philip Mazzei: Selected Writings and Correspondence, ed. Margherita Marchione, vol.1 (Prato: Edizioni del Palazzo, 1983) 68. Translation of the original by Marchione. 22 Marchione, xx-xxi. of the American States by giving him intelligence of overseas events and accurately predicting the outcome of battles and key negotiations. The sovereign remained unimpressed. Reading Mazzei's letters to the Grand Duke one after the other, one quickly notices Mazzei's growing frustration at Leopold's indifference, which betrayed his position as an anglophile. In his Memorie, Mazzei later recalls … I wrote the Grand Duke my 11 th and last letter on March 16, 1783 […] no longer in the hope of producing any effect, but so as not to have to blame myself for not making every possible effort to produce one, and also to vent my feelings a little regarding the silly and childish behaviour shown me by that sovereign, whose character (viewed too favourably by various individuals of merit in Tuscany) came to be perfectly and universally known in Germany, as soon as he came into possession of the House of Austria 23 .

In 1781, even before leaving Florence to return to France and later to Virginia, Mazzei had already attempted to maximize the impact of his propagandist writings by sending them to the French foreign ministry in an unsolicited letter to Vergennes. Enclosed in the letter were copies of four of his political pamphlets as well as of a letter to his friend Marquis Caracciolo, who had served as Neapolitan Ambassador to France and was then Viceroy of Sicily. The pamphlets enclosed were his "Observations of a Citizen of the World in Answer to an American", written from Virginia in 1776 for the Grand Duke of Tuscany; his "Reasons why the American States cannot be accused of having rebelled" (1781)aimed at reassuring European monarchs that the American revolution could not be reproduced in Europe; his "Reflections tending to predict the outcome of the present war" (April 1781), and an essay composed specifically for Vergennes entitled "Arguments purposing to show by what means France could derive the greatest and most permanent benefits from the current American Revolution". As I would like to argue in a second part of my thesis, aside from promoting the American cause, these different writings clearly served the purpose of establishing Mazzei's credentials as a diplomat as well, thereby furthering his personal ambitions.

The third phase of Mazzei's propaganda is associated with his second stay in Europe after the end of the war. Having returned to Europe on private business after a short stay in Virginia from 1783 to 1785, Mazzei found himself in Paris, hoping to obtain a diplomatic posting on account of Congress, and spending his time among the liberal intellectuals and aristocrats of the time. This third phase of propaganda corresponds with the writing of his Recherches, which he undertook between 1785 and 1788, upon realizing that Europeans had a superficial and piecemeal understanding of American society and institutions, as well as of the causes that had led to the war. After encouraging Americans to rebel while in Virginia and seeking support for the rebellion abroad during his first trip to Europe, Mazzei was therefore returning to the topic of the promotion of the American ideal by offering a rereading of the country's history in the aftermath of its revolution and completing it with an empirical study of the nascent republic's contemporary realities and challenges. Written for a readership of Europeans, Mazzei's writing of the Recherches was another attempt at translating the American experience for people on the other side of the Atlantic. In doing so, however, Mazzei was not unambiguously proposing the American model as one to be followed in a European context. Much the opposite, he showed significant reservations in admitting that the model of the American revolution could be transferred to Europe, raising a number of fundamental questions regarding Mazzei's status both as a revolutionary and as a "universalist" enlightenment thinker, which introduces the concept of pragmatism that I referred to in my title. 23 Mazzei, Memorie 276. My translation. "[…] scrissi al granduca Leopoldo l'11ma e ultima lettera il 16 marzo 1783 coll'aggiunta del foglio, che principia: Filippo Mazzei era stato, ecc., non più colla speranza che producesse alcuno effetto, ma per non potermi rimproverare di non aver fatto tutti i miei sforzi per produrlo, come pure per isfogarmi un poco, riguardo allo sciocco e pueril contegno tenuto meco da quel sovrano, il cui carattere (troppo vantaggiosamente interpretato da vari soggetti di merito in Toscana) fu perfettamente ed universalmente conosciuto in Germania, subito che giunse al possesso dei beni della casa d'Austria."

Mazzei was not just a propagandist. He appears to me as a "pragmatic propagandist", because rather than embarking on a systematic, universal defense of republican principles, his political writings, for the most part remain centered on the advocacy of the American cause. In his 1989 article on Mazzei, Jack P. Greene concludes, "With Franklin and Crèvecoeur, among many others, Mazzei was thus an early exponent of the concept of American exceptionalism," pointing out that "… his primary message to Europeans about America was that the American republics were different from anything encompassed within their experience 24 ."

The reference to exceptionalism needs to be qualified and defined. One has a tendency to associate the idea to early images of the "city upon the hill," but as Tortarolo makes clear in his recent article, there is no trace of religious exceptionalism in Mazzei's writings: "For Mazzei, like for Jefferson, colonial identity is civil, secular. There is no mention of the city upon the hill, nor of any enactment of a providential mission to influence history by divine will" 25 . Rather, the exceptionality can be found in the particular territorial, cultural and historical specificities that set the North American colonies -and later states -apart from any other country in Europe. Again quoting Greene, What made them different was the extensive space and opportunity they provided for their free inhabitants; the industry and incitement to industry, activity, and schemes of improvement produced by that space and opportunity; the absence of aristocracy and a society organized into legally established ranks; the broad popular base of government, the political enlightenment of the citizenry, the citizenry's intense preoccupation with the pursuit of domestic happiness; and the laudably small scope of the public realm 26 .

Nor is this exceptionalism tainted by fanaticism. Mazzei does not depict America as a promised land and joins Franklin in his attempts at dissuading Europeans from perceiving it as such and being tempted to emigrate massively 27 . In his Dispute of the New World, Gerbi describes Mazzei as "a man full of good sense, careful, assured, and as alien to the idealization of America as he is critical of the continent's slanderers." Further on, he continues, "… Mazzei shows himself so averse to any Americanistic fanaticism that his own position becomes correspondingly stronger, both in arguing with the critics of the newborn United States and … with those of the physical nature of the American continent 28 ." Far from being delirious, Mazzei's portrait of the United States is grounded in the empiricism of experience (his own!) 29 . Again, Mazzei's outlook is pragmatic. To him, American society is not perfect, but engaged in a noble experiment both well worth defending and not easily transferable to any other context in precisely the same shape or form. This is why Mazzei does not appear to me as a "universalist," but rather as a careful realist. A non-fanatical "Americanist". This does not mean he didn't believe in universal principles of freedom and equality. Much the opposite, the Florentine's political philosophy is strongly grounded in Enlightenment ideology and Mazzei is a vocal advocate of inalienable rights like freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of representation, freedom of trade, universal suffrage etc. While he militates to promote the spread of these ideals, however, he does not believe them to be equally applicable to every context on the same time-frame without running the risk of disrupting the fabric of 24 Jack P. Greene, " Philip Mazzei: Cultural Broker in America and Europe in the age of Enlightenment and Revolution", in Jack P. Greene (ed.), Understanding the American Revolution: Issues and Actors (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1995) 309-28. 25 Tortarolo, "Filippo Mazzei," 8. "Per Mazzei, come per Jefferson, l'identità delle colonie è civile, secolare. Non c'è menzione della città sulla collina, né di una missione provvidenziale in atto nella storia per volontà divina." 26 Greene, 327. 27 Mazzei, Recherches, vol 4, 76-102. 28 Gerbi, 272-3. 29 Gerbi, society. It is this very disruption that makes him particularly critical of the later phases of the French revolution, alienating him from some of his more radical friends like Mr. and Mrs. Condorcet. Was Mazzei a revolutionary? Not really. Or at least not in every circumstance. In a letter dated January 19th, 1782, Mazzei's lifelong friend Pietro Paolo Celesia wrote him, "Lord Cornwallis Burgoyned at York looks to me like a decisive event for the destiny of North America. I congratulate Your Lordship because I know how much you love republics in that part of the world and monarchies in our Europe. The fact is that the character and talents of the men making up a government are more decisive with reference to its good or bad condition than the fundamental laws of its constitution 30 ." While the tone of Celesia's message is teasing, and the assertion that Mazzei loved monarchies in Europe is an obvious exaggeration, it does highlight the fact that circumstances mattered a lot for Mazzei and that his outlook on social evolution was more reformist than revolutionary.

Even in terms of his narrative of the American revolution, Mazzei appears conservative. In the first book of his Recherches, like in his previous pamphlet "Reasons why the American States cannot be accused of having rebelled," Mazzei highlights the fact that the American revolution was not really a revolution at all, but rather a legitimate assertion of the colonial inhabitants' historical right to freedom and self-government. In the opening lines of his "Reasons", one can read, "Of the many and powerful reasons the American States had to oppose the unjust demands of Great Britain, the foremost, strongest, least equivocal, and such as to corroborate all the others, is the right of sovereignty enjoyed since the earliest settlements, which can in no way be disputed 31 ." Rather than a rejection of the monarchical model and a subversion of social hierarchies, Mazzei presents the War of Independence as a fight against British usurpation of power in America, for which he blames parliament the most. As such, he echoes previous writings by Franklin and Jefferson; most notably Jefferson's Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), which builds a similar case for independence. In highlighting the continuity of the revolution with the American past, Mazzei seems to flirt with Burkean whiggism more than with Paine-like radicalism.

Nowhere is Mazzei's political moderation more apparent than in his attitude towards France in the context of its revolution. Originally enthusiastic about the spread of enlightenment ideas and the questioning of absolutism, Mazzei ended up profoundly disappointed by the radical turn of events in the aftermath of the deposition of the king. In his Memorie, one can read "But what was dearest to me at the time was the great cause that was being agitated in France, a favorable outcome of which would surely have brought about the happiness of Europe and probably of humankind in general 32 ." In a similar hope to Paine's he went as far as predicting the establishment of a supranational community, regulating relations among countries for the purpose of establishing permanent international peace.

There was no longer any doubt, that France, England and the Republic of the United States would convene to have a single currency, a single unit of measure, and of weight; and it was seriously believed that the flail of war could be prevented, by forming a tribunal of deputies of all civilized nations, with the power to settle controversies, and of obliging the different parties to abide by its decisions 33 . 30 30 Pietro Paolo Celesia, "To Filippo Mazzei," 19 January 1782, document 151 in, Philip Mazzei: Selected Writings and Correspondence, ed. Margherita Marchione, vol.1 (Prato: Edizioni del Palazzo, 1983) 330-331. In a footnote, Marchione explains that "Cornwallis' capture at Yooktown is compared to Burgoyne's capture at Saratoga four years earlier." 331. 31 Filippo Mazzei, "Reasons why the American States cannot be accused of having rebelled", 1781, document 140 in Marchione, 293. 32 Mazzei, Memorie, vol. 2, 349. « Ma quel che di più di tutto mi stava a cuore a quell'epoca era la gran causa che si agitava in Francia, il cui buono evento avrebbe sicuramente prodotto la felicità dell'Europa e probabilmente di tutto il genere umano." 33 Mazzei, Memorie 349. "Non vi era più dubbio, che la Francia, l'Inghilterra e la repubblica degli Stati Uniti convenivano di avere un'istessa moneta, un'istessa misura, e un'istesso peso; e si trattava seriamente d'impedire il Progress in France, however, was not to be achieved through the forceful deposition of the King, but rather through the establishment of a constitutional monarchy. "You might not know, that the good king Louis XVI himself desired the reforms that were justly being demanded by the nation; reforms which would have established on solid grounds the true greatness and happiness of his successors 34 ." It was in opposition to the Jacobins that Mazzei joined and helped found the "opposition" Club de 1789 and was charged with its foreign correspondence. In comparing the two clubs, Mazzei wrote, "The club of the Jacobins tended to ignite fires everywhere, ours to procure unity and calm 35 ." By 1791, Mazzei had become profoundly disillusioned in the outcome of the revolution and had fallen out with his very close friend Condorcet over the issue of republicanism, his friendship having been replaced by Thomas Paine's. In an act of desperation over turn events had taken, Mazzei went as far as advocating the political murder of a number of top revolutionaries whom he perceived as particularly dangerous for France, among whom were the Lameth brothers, Barnave, Roberspierre, Danton, Desmoulins, Marat, and more surprisingly Duport, Menou et Noailles… 36 Confronted by La Rochefoucauld's indignation at his suggestion, Mazzei reports to have answered « Voilà la cause de la France, que dis-je de la France! Du monde entier ruiné à jamais ; et chaque goutte de sang que vous épargnez ce soir, doit vous en couter des barriques. » He then concluded "I left mortified to the extreme and couldn't think of anything else but leaving France as soon as possible 37 ."

Mazzei's radical opposition to the establishment of a republic in France highlights the extent of his intellectual difference from Paine, whom he may also have been personally jealous of. It is interesting to note that while Mazzei entertained a florid correspondence with many of the American revolutionaries of his time, he seemed to have had no direct contact with Paine, whom he most certainly knew and whose criticism on Quakers he had approved seconded in his Recherches 38 . Together with Condorcet, and Achille du Chastellet, Paine had formed La société Républicaine in 1791. They had also set up a paper known as le Républicain, voicing the radical ideas that Mazzei was opposed to.

In comparing the two "citizens of the world", one could advance that Paine was a universalist political thinker and an idealist, while Mazzei remained more of a moderate and pragmatic analyst and observer. Paine's advocacy of freedom in his Rights of Man, had no frontiers, either geographical or of circumstance. Mazzei -more of a reformist -thought the opposite and believed that enlightenment ideals had to be applied gradually if they were to succeed over time. In terms of their writing, while Paine contributed major theoretical works of revolutionary literature to the enlightenment legacy, Mazzei, aside from the Recherches and his contributions to American constitutional theory 39 limited himself to writing pamphlets offering piecemeal practical advice, which he believed could be exported from the American experience. In advancing this, I am referring to essays such as his 1790 "Au peuple français sur les assignats, par un Citoyen des Etats-Unis d'Amérique", his "Reflections on the evils of Mendicacy", written in 1782 and published in 1799, his "Reflections on the Nature of Exchange and of flagello della guerra, formando un tribunale composto di deputati di tutte le nazioni culte, con potere di decidere le controversie, e di obbligar le parti a starsene alla decisione." 34 Mazzei, Memorie 350. "Voi forse non saprete, che il buon luigi XVI bramava egli stesso le riforme giustamente richieste dalla nazione; le quali avrebbero stabilita su fondamenti solidi la vera grandezza e felicità sua e dei suoi successori." 35 Mazzei, Memorie 362. "Il club dei Giacobini tendeva a metter tutto in combustione, il nostro a procurar l'unione e la quiete." 36 Mazzei,Memorie 382. 37 Ibid. "Me n'andai mortificato all'estremo, e non pensai più che a partir di Francia il più presto possibile." 38 Mazzei,Recherches,vol.3,. 39 Mazzei was particularly interested in constitutional debates. He was one of the main founder of the Virgina Consitutional Society. He had also called for constitutional reform in Virginia in 1776 in a pamphlet entitled "Instructions of the Freeholders of Albemarle County to their Delegates in Convention", which can be found in Marchione, 90-103. Money" (1803), along with the previously cited pamphlets aimed at encouraging trade and commercial cooperation between the several European states and America.

While sound, Mazzei's pragmatic advice never really took off. Neither did the Recherches, although they did end up landing Mazzei a diplomatic position as the Polish agent in Paris. A few commentators have noted that one of the major contributions of the Recherches was that of bringing intellectuals closer together across the Atlantic, as the work contained several essays written by people other than Mazzei, and most notably Turgot and Condorcet. It was by reading Mazzei's Recherches that Madison became acquainted with Condorcet's ideas for the first time, for example 40 .

Mazzei's role as a "connecting agent", or "cultural broker", as Greene labels him, therefore appears as his major and lifelong contribution, and one that he was naturally good at. In establishing ways of bringing people and ideas together, Mazzei was constantly thinking ahead. Before traveling to Virginia for the first time, for example, he had thought of establishing ties between the major Italian academies (like Bologna) and the American Philosophical Society, by sending copies of the Transactions of the Philosophical Society to the deans of the Italian institutions. In a letter to Mazzei dated 1773, Sebastiano Canterzani of the Academy of Bologna, wrote "I thank you, Sir, both for the trouble you took to get us the gift and the kindness with which you offer yourself as the intermediary for the correspondence and exchange which in the future may take place between the two Societies 41 ." Upon settling in Virginia, besides importing agricultural goods and products, Mazzei also made a point of importing relevant books and political pamphlets, contributing to the spread of Italian political thought in America. It is through Mazzei that Jefferson first came to know Cesare Beccaria's On Crimes and Punishments, which is one of the earliest works philosophically opposing the idea of the death penalty.

Before returning to Europe for the second time, Mazzei took time to translate the statutes of the Virginia Constitutional Society, of which he was a primary founding member, into Italian and French, to keep people on the other side of the Atlantic informed. In a letter to John Blair -president of the Constitutional Society -dated May 12 th 1785, Mazzei also asks him to propose the admission of foreign honorary members such as La Rochefoucauld, Marquis Beccaria (Milan), Mr. Fontana (Florence) and Mr. Spallanzani (Bologna), again in an effort to keep intellectuals on the two sides of the Atlantic connected 42 . These are only some examples of the tireless networking efforts that Mazzei engaged in throughout his life, efforts which seem to have contributed in reducing the distance between Transatlantic revolutionary stages.

While looking at the way Mazzei played the role as a "pragmatic propagandist" of the American cause and more generally of enlightenment ideals is one way of understanding the concept, I am also intrigued by the way in which the idiom could be used to explore Mazzei's life at a more personal level. Shifting points of view from the "macro" sphere to the "micro" one of Mazzei's experience of modernity, what I'd like to do in the context of my research is also to look at how Mazzei may have used his analytical and communicational skills to ensure his own status and economic survival. Besides furthering the American cause and spreading enlightenment values, Mazzei's literature also served the more immediate and pragmatic purpose of enabling him to make his way in life, establishing the credibility he needed to be able to evolve in political and social spheres much higher than his own. This bottom-up approach to history, mixing personal narratives with vaster revolutionary ones on both sides of the Atlantic world, appears to me as an interesting one, and one that historians like Janet Polasky 40 David Williams, Condorcet and Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) 24. 41 Sebastiano Canterzani, "From Sebastiano Canterzani", 28 June 1773, document 29 in Marchione, 45. 42 Filippo Mazzei, "To John Blair", 12 May 1785, document 230 in Marchione, 470.