CHASTELAIN, Georges (1403-1475), called L ’ Adventureux, the celebrated Burgundian chronicler, was born at Alost in Flanders. When only seven years old be began the study of letters. This, however, he abandoned to become a soldier, serving first of all as a squire. Particularly favoured by Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy, he quitted the career of arms towards 1443, and devoted himself to the service of that prince, who made him successively pantier, orator, and finally grand chronicler of the house of Burgundy. In addition to such duties as these offices entailed upon their holder, Chastelain was often employed diplomatically, and was also accustomed to direct the dramatic entertainments designed for the amusement of the ducal court. A heavy but insolent opuscule in verse, published by him in 1455, had nearly compromised his safety, as it was held to contain reflections injurious to the honour of the king and nobility of F rance; Chastelain, however, extricated himself from the difficulty by issuing a sort of reply (in prose) to his own libel. About this time, too, at the request of Philip, he began his most important work, the Grande Chronique. Philip’s son, Charles the Bold, continued to confide in and favour Chastelain as his father had done, and conferred on him the order of the Golden Fleece, with the title of Indiciaire— a designation intended as descriptive of one who “démonstroit par escripture authentique lee admirables gestes des chevaliers et confrères de l’ordre.” At the beginning of the new reign, however, Chastelain retired to Valenciennes, where he busied himself till his death in the production of his Chronique (in which he was assisted by Jean Molinet, his disciple and continuator) and of other works, imaginative aud historical....
Among his contemporaries, Georges Chastelain acquired by his verses the style and title of a second Homer; but posterity, in relegating his poetry to eternal oblivion, has been careful of his memory. As an historian, Chastelain is deserving of more attention. He was a soldier and traveller, who had yet been trained to letters, the favourite of a splendid prince, and personally acquainted with most of the actors in the great scenes which his position enabled him to study on the very theatre of their action. His method of writing history, to judge by a declaration of his own yet extant, was not such as would have occurred to the mere compiler or writer from dictation. The vast mass of material collected during his long and busy life was intended to be fused and shaped as his own conclusions, his own great experience of men and years, should determine, and not altogether according to the requirements of party and feudal feeling. Impartiality, however, must not be considered one of his virtues. A brilliant satirist, and at the same time, a master of eulogy, it was his interest to use all his gift in his master’s service, and he did so use it.
Only three fragments of the Chronique, which was to have filled six volumes, in folio are known to exist—the first extending from 1419 to 1422, and the second, withlarge breaks in the text, from 14G1 to 1474. A third mutilated fragment is understood to refer to the period uncovered by the larger chapters, but it neither tells a connected story nor fills the great gap between the other two
See Buchon, Chroniques nationales and Panthéon littéraire; Quicherat, Bibliothèque de l' École des C hartes; Reiffeuberg, Ducs de Boιcr gogne, 8vo, 1836.
[591 words — estimated reading time: 4 minutes]
