Depuis l'ouvrage de John Pocock, The Machiavellian Moment. Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Tradition (1975), on connait l'importance de James Harrington dans la pensee politique anglo-americaine a la periode moderne. Parce qu'au-dela de l'acte de resistance a la tyrannie, il promeut la democratie et propose les moyens constitutionnels de mettre en oeuvre la souverainete populaire dans un pays de vaste etendue, Harrington a incarne une forme distinctive de republicanisme. En retracant l'histoire de sa reception dans la France des Lumieres, cet ouvrage a pour but de combler un hiatus entre le grand recit pocockien du republicanisme machiavelien et l'historiographie de la Revolution francaise. En cela, il s'inscrit dans le panorama brosse en 2010 par l'historienne Rachel Hammersley, et va au-dela. D'une part, il accorde a Hume, Jaucourt ou Rousseau, aux cotes de ses nombreux traducteurs et commentateurs, un role central dans l'actualisation de la pensee de Harrington. D'autre part, il montre que son heritage intellectuel fut pluriel. Celui-ci n'est en effet pas seulement l'inspirateur de dispositions constitutionnelles specifiques : a l'heure ou se developpe l'economie politique, Harrington apparait comme le penseur d'une egalite relative des fortunes, percue comme la seule base possible d'un ordre politique stable. -- John Pocock's book The Machiavellian Moment. Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Tradition (1975) has shown the importance of James Harrington in Anglo-American modern political thought. Beyond the act of resistance to tyranny, he vindicates democracy and provides the constitutional means for implementing popular sovereignty in a vast country. In doing so, Harrington has incarnated a distinctive form of republicanism. By reconstructing the history of his reception in eighteenth century France, this book aims to bridge the gap between the great Pocockian narrative of Machiavellian republicanism and the historiography of the French Revolution. It is set against the panorama offered by Rachel Hammersley in 2010 and aims to go further. On the one hand, it shows how central Hume, Jaucourt or Rousseau have been in reviving Harrington's thought, along with his numerous translators and commentators. On the other hand, it shows that his intellectual legacy was diverse. He did not only stand as the inspirer of specific constitutional measures: as political economy developed, Harrington also appeared as the theoretician of a relative equality of wealth among the people, perceived by many as the true basis of a stable political order.