Le projet historique de Jean Froissart s’inscrit dans un discours particulier sur les genres historiques, sur les rapports entre la forme et la vérité que le récit des faits est censé véhiculer, sur la manière de construire l’autorité de l’histoire racontée. C’est au croisement entre ce contexte et l’individualité de l’auteur que nous avons voulu sonder les perspectives du chroniqueur sur l’écriture historique. Préoccupé dès le début par les questions de l’impartialité et de la crédibilité de son propos, Froissart met en place un système référentiel de plus en plus complexe qui a pour but d’authentifier son récit des grands événements qui secouaient les royaumes occidentaux depuis presqu’un siècle. La réalité historique que Jean Froissart recrée dans ses Chroniques est dépendante des facteurs personnels qui conditionnaient son appréhension du monde, des manières dont il s’identifiait dans la société de son temps. Elle est recréée avec un grand talent de raconter, mais aussi – ce que l’on a trop souvent méconnu – avec un souci de plus en plus accru de découvrir et d’exposer les réseaux de causes qui sont à l’œuvre dans le cours des événements. Cependant, les moyens littéraires auxquels Froissart faisait appel et qui sont associés notamment à l’art du conteur qu’il était, participent eux à l’authenticité de l’histoire qu´il raconte. Car si le chroniqueur se veut celui qui éternise les faits dignes de mémoire, il se refuse en même temps à écrire une autre histoire que véridique. Et cette préoccupation première de son écriture ne doit pas être obscurcie par le fait que son approche ne corresponde pas à nos critères contemporains de l’écriture de l’histoire. / Jean Froissart´s historical project falls within a specific discourse on historical genres, on relationships between form and truth which an account of deeds is expected to convey, on the manner in which the authority of a story being told is constructed. It is on the very intersection of this context and the individuality of the author that I based my search for the chronicler’s perspectives on the writing of history. Froissart was from the outset concerned with the issues of impartiality and credibility of his account and created a system of references, which grew more and more complex, designed to authenticate his version of important events which had been shaking the West for almost a century. The historical reality which Jean Froissart recreates in his Chronicles is dependent on personal factors which determined his understanding of the world as well as his self-identification within the society of his time. It is undeniably recreated with great storytelling talent, but also – and this has often been overlooked – with growing desire to discover and expose the relations of causes which were at work in the course of the events. Nonetheless, Froissart’s literary means, which are often associated with his artistry as a storyteller, do contribute, for their part, to the authenticity of the story. For if the chronicler presents himself as the one who eternalizes deeds worthy of remembrance, he refuses at the same time to write any other history than the true and truthful one. This primary concern of his should not be obscured by the fact that his approach and methods do not correspond to our contemporary criteria of historical writing.

The Construction of Historical Reality in Jean Froissart's Chronicles Jean Froissart, one of the most famous chroniclers of the Middle Ages, is generally recognized for the literary qualities of his work, less so for the credibility of his account. In my research I have endeavoured to follow those scholars whose aim has been to rehabilitate the author by studying him not on the basis of principles which govern our contemporary understanding of history as an academic discipline, but rather on the basis of conceptual movements which conditioned historical writing in the 14th century, taking into account the traditions upon which medieval conception of history was built. Put differently, this work seeks to examine closely the "historical forge" of Jean Froissart. Clearly, Froissart's historical project falls within a specific discourse on historical genres, on relationships between form and truth which an account of deeds is expected to convey, on the manner in which the authority of a story being told is constructed. It is on the very intersection of this context, on the one hand, and the individuality of the author, on the other, that I based my search for the chronicler's perspectives on the writing of history. Froissart was from the outset concerned with the issues of impartiality and credibility...