Comment ont été continuées les Grandes Chroniques de France dans la première moitié du XIVe siècle

Abstract

In the first third of the 14th century, several attempts were made to extend the " Roman des rois ", i.e. the original nucleus of the Grandes Chroniques de France, compiled at Saint-Denis by the monk Primat, beyond 1223. The preferred solution was to use the Chronique française abrégée des rois de France by Guillaume de Nangis, enlarged and continued at Saint-Denis after his death. In the 1350s, Richard Lescot chose a somewhat different option : he reverted to the Vitae of Louis IX and Philip III, and next devised a compilation based on the Chronique française abrégée and the Chronicon of Guillaume de Nangis together with its two Latin continuations. From 1322, the second continuation, being the main source for the period, was supplemented with the chronicle of Géraud de Frachet and the Chronique de Flandre. After 1340, although he kept using the continuation of Géraud de Frachet's chronicle up to the point where the original breaks off in 1344, the compiler ceased to use the Chronique de Flandre. Instead, up to 1347, he made conspicuous use of the continuation of Guillaume de Nangis's Chronique française abrégée. All known copies of that text extend into the early 1380s, and thus belong to a later period than the " Richard Lescot version " of the Grandes Chroniques de France. But it can be proved that an intermediate version once existed, one that ended shortly before the surrender of Calais in 1347. By taking into account these two sources, of which one was incorrectly identified (the Chronique de Flandre) and one hitherto unknown (the continuation of the Chronique française abrégée), it is possible to shed new light upon the methods of the author responsible for the reign of Philip VI in the Grandes Chroniques. des rois de France by Guillaume de Nangis, enlarged and continued at Saint-Denis after his death. In the 1350s, Richard Lescot chose a somewhat different option : he reverted to the Vitae of Louis IX and Philip III, and next devised a compilation based on the Chronique française abrégée and the Chronicon of Guillaume de Nangis together with its two Latin continuations. From 1322, the second continuation, being the main source for the period, was supplemented with the chronicle of Géraud de Frachet and the Chronique de Flandre. After 1340, although he kept using the continuation of Géraud de Frachet's chronicle up to the point where the original breaks off in 1344, the compiler ceased to use the Chronique de Flandre. Instead, up to 1347, he made conspicuous use of the continuation of Guillaume de Nangis's Chronique française abrégée. All known copies of that text extend into the early 1380s, and thus belong to a later period than the " Richard Lescot version " of the Grandes Chroniques de France. But it can be proved that an intermediate version once existed, one that ended shortly before the surrender of Calais in 1347. By taking into account these two sources, of which one was incorrectly identified (the Chronique de Flandre) and one hitherto unknown (the continuation of the Chronique française abrégée), it is possible to shed new light upon the methods of the author responsible for the reign of Philip VI in the Grandes Chroniques.