the others had gone, a most frightful phantom appeared as she sat,
and laid hold of the woman and began to drag her off. She screamed
and wept since she saw there was no one to help, but still tried to
make a courageous resistance. After two or three hours the other
women returned and found her lying on the ground half dead and
unable to speak. Still she made signs with her hand, but they did
not understand and she continued speechless. The phantom which had
appeared to her attacked so many persons in that house that they left
it and went elsewhere. In two or three months’ time the woman came to
the church and had the merit to recover her speech. And so she told
with her own lips what she had endured.
PROCEDURE IN CASE OF A MIRACLE
(_Ibid._, Book III, ch. 45)
The facts that I relate ought not to seem to any one unworthy of
belief, because the names of individuals are not mentioned in the
account. The cause of it is this: when they are restored to health
by the saint of God, they leave immediately, and they sometimes go
so secretly that, so to speak, they are noticed by no one. And when
the report has spread that a miracle has been done by the blessed
bishop, I summon those who have charge of the church and inquire into
what has happened; but I do not always learn the names from them. I
generally tell by name of those I have been able to see or examine
personally.
MINOR MIRACLES WORKED ON GREGORY
(_Ibid._, Book IV, Ch. 2)
At one time my tongue became uncomfortably swelled up, so that when
I wished to speak it usually made me stutter, which was somewhat
unseemly. I went to the saint’s tomb and drew my awkward tongue along
the wooden lattice. The swelling went down at once and I became well.
It was a serious swelling and filled the cavity where the palate is.
Then three days later my lip began to have a painful beating in it.
I went again to the tomb to get help and when I had touched my lip to
the hanging curtain the pulsation stopped at once. And I suppose this
came from an over abundance of blood; still trusting to the saint’s
power I did not try to lessen the [amount of] blood and this matter
caused me no further trouble.
GREGORY’S UNCLE, ST. GALL
(_The Lives of the Fathers_, Ch. 6)
St. Gall was a servant of God from his youth up, loving the Lord with
his whole heart, and he loved what he knew to be beloved by God.
His father was named Georgius and his mother Leocadia, a descendant
of Vectius Epagatus who, as the history of Eusebius relates, was a
martyr at Lyons. They belonged among the leading senators so that
no family could be found in the Gauls better born or nobler. And
although Gall’s father wished to ask for a certain senator’s daughter
for him, he took a single attendant and went to the monastery at
Cournon, six miles from Clermont, and besought the abbot to consent
to give him the tonsure. The abbot noticed the good sense and fine
bearing of the youth and inquired his name, his family and native
place. He replied that he was called Gall and was a citizen of
Auvergne, a son of the senator Georgius. When the abbot learned that
he belonged to one of the first families, he said: “My son, what you
wish is good, but you must first bring it to your father’s attention
and if he gives his consent, I will do what you ask.” Then the abbot
sent messengers in regard to this matter to his father, asking
what he wished to be done with the youth. The father was a little
disappointed, but said: “He is my oldest son and I therefore wished
him to marry, but if the Lord deigns to receive him into His service,
let His will rather than mine be done.” And he added: “Consent to the
child’s request which he made by God’s inspiration.”
2. The abbot on receiving this message made him a clerk. He was
very chaste and as if already old he had no wicked desires: he
refrained from a young man’s mirth; he had a voice wonderfully
sweet and melodious; he devoted himself constantly to reading; he
took pleasure in fasting and was very abstemious. When the blessed
bishop Quintian came to this monastery and heard him sing, he did not
allow him to stay there any longer, but took him to the city and,
like the heavenly father, fed him on the sweetness of the spirit. On
his father’s death, when his voice was improving day by day and he
was a great favorite among the people, they reported this to king
Theodoric, who at once sent for him and showed him such affection
that he loved him more than his own son; he was loved by the queen
with a similar love, not only for his beautiful voice, but also for
his chastity. At that time king Theodoric had taken many clerks from
Auvergne whom he ordered to serve God in the church at Trèves; but
he never allowed the blessed Gall to be separated from him. So it
came that when the king went to Cologne, he went with him. There was
there a heathen temple full of various articles of worship where the
neighboring barbarians used to make offerings and stuff themselves
with food and drink until they vomited; there also they worshipped
images as god, and carved limbs in wood, each one the limb in which
he had suffered pain. When the holy Gall heard of this, he hastened
to the place with only one clerk when none of the benighted pagans
was present, and set it on fire. And they saw the smoke of the fire
rolling up to the sky and searched for the one who had set it, and
found him and pursued him sword in hand. He fled and took refuge in
the king’s court. But when the king had learned from the pagans’
threats what had been done, he pacified them with agreeable words
and so calmed their furious rage. The blessed man would often weep
in telling this story, and say: “Unhappy me that I did not stand my
ground and let my life be ended in this affair.”[97] He was deacon at
the time.…
3. Later when the blessed bishop Quintian passed from this world by
God’s command, the holy Gall was living in Clermont, and the people
of the city assembled at the house of the priest Inpetratus, Gall’s
uncle on his mother’s side, lamenting at the bishop’s death and
asking who should be appointed in his place. After long debate they
returned each to his own house. On their departure the holy Gall
called one of the clerks and said, the holy spirit rushing into him:
“What are these people muttering about? Why are they running to and
fro? What are they debating? They are wasting their time,” said he.
“I am going to be bishop; the Lord will deign to bestow this honor on
me. Now when you hear that I am returning from the king’s presence,
take my predecessor’s horse with the saddle on him and come and bring
him to me. If you refuse to obey me, take care you are not sorry for
it later.” As he said this, he was lying on his bed. The clerk was
angry at him and abused him and struck him on the side, breaking
the bed at the same time, and went off in a rage. On his departure
the priest Inpetratus said to the blessed Gall: “My son, hear my
advice: don’t waste a minute, but go to the king and tell him what
has happened here, and if the Lord inspires him to bestow this holy
office on you, I shall give thanks to God; otherwise you can at least
recommend yourself to the man who is appointed.” He went and reported
to the king what had happened.…
And the clerks of Clermont, with the choice of the foolish, went to
the king with many gifts. Even then that seed of iniquity had begun
to germinate, that bishoprics were sold by kings and bought by the
clerks. Then they heard from the king that they were going to have
St. Gall as bishop. He was ordained priest and the king gave orders
to invite the citizens to a feast at the expense of the treasury and
to make merry over the promotion of Gall the future bishop. This
was done. He was in the habit of telling that he had given no more
for the office of bishop than a third of a gold piece which he had
given to the cook who prepared the feast. Then the king appointed
two bishops to accompany him to Clermont. And the clerk, Viventius
by name, who had struck him on the side when he was in bed, hastened
to meet the bishop according to his command, but not without great
shame, and he presented himself and the horse which Gall had ordered.
When they had gone into the bath together, Gall gently reproached him
for the pain in his side which he had incurred from the contemptuous
violence of the clerk, and he caused him great shame, not in a spirit
of anger, however, but only delighting in a pious joke. After that he
was received into the city with much singing and was ordained bishop
in his own church.
FOOTNOTES:
[83] The following brief selections serve to illustrate
Gregory’s personality and point of view.
[84] Gregory then goes on to show that the miracles of
the saints replace for him the wonders and feats of
antique mythology.
[85] Theodobert I, 534-548.
[86] One of the most fertile spots in France. _Cf._
Lavisse, _Histoire de France_, I, pp. 296-301.
[87] “Insequitur clamor virorum strepitusque mulierum,
ululatus infantum,”--a reminiscence of Vergil,
_Aen._ I, 87, “Insequitur clamorque virum stridorque
rudentum.”
[88] The vessel used for the purpose indicated here, the
“monstrance,” was in the shape of a tower. _Cf._
DuCange, _art. Turris_.
[89] The identification of flies with demons occurs also
on page 237. For a similar case of disinclination to
let a fly settle on a wine cup see Frazer, _The Golden
Bough_, 8, 291.
[90] Cf. p. 58. This punishment of Auvergne took place in
532, 6 years before Gregory’s birth.
[91] The site of St. Julian’s church. Brioude is situated
about 40 miles up the valley of the Allier from
Clermont.
[92] Gregory’s confessions of inability to write in a
polished style, though probably hypocritical, are
nevertheless in accordance with fact.
[93] Gregory’s interest in this miracle is one of
technique. As a rule material “touch” of the source
of “virtue” was regarded as a necessity, but “mere
invocation” was sometimes effective. The cure that
is related is an extreme form of the latter. See
_Introd._ xx, xxi.
[94] See Bonnet, p. 272, _Note 3_.
[95] _Tyriaca_ for _theriaca_, (_a_) antidote against the
bite of serpents, (_b_) remedy in general.
[96] Noon.
[97] Gall would in that case have been a martyr with all
a martyr’s advantages. He does not regret running
away as an act of prudence, but as an injudicious act
spiritually speaking. Cf. Marignan, _Le culte des
saints sous les Mérovingiens_ (Paris, 1899), ch. 1.
NOTES
[A] P. =1=, l. 21 f. Gregory’s vague idea of a symmetrical
chronological development of history leading up to a great
termination, namely, “the approaching end of the world,” finds
expression in a number of passages; cf. pp. 5, 6, 7, 105, 208, 244.
It is a peculiar fact that the chronological tastes of the Christian
historiographers and theologians were largely due to their interest
in the future, which was as definitely marked out as the past by the
Providence of God.
[B] P. =5=, l. 1 f. Here as well as in his “first preface” (p. 1)
Gregory gives his point of view as definitely as any historian has
ever done. The reader has merely to bear it in mind in order to
interpret the narrative. Gregory’s impulse to write the _History of
the Franks_ came not from an interest in the Frankish state, but
from an interest in the orthodox church, of which he regarded the
Franks as the champions. It is for this reason that he is far more
definite in expressing his adherence to the creed than his allegiance
to the Frankish kings. It is this attitude, too, that explains his
impatience with civil war (p. 105). Cf. _Introd._, p. xxi and pp. 53,
54.
[C] P. =6=, l. 36 f. Gregory’s references to his sources are
relatively clear in Book I and can be traced through the succeeding
chapters. The main source is naturally Jerome’s translation of
Eusebius’ chronicle supplemented by Orosius’ _History Against the
Pagans_. He also uses Rufinus’ translation and continuation of
Eusebius’ _Ecclesiastical History_. On these sources see other
volumes of the _Records of Civilization_.
[D] P. =9=, l. 1. The stade was 606 ft. 9 in. in length. It took
about 8⅔ stades to make an English mile.
[E] P. =9=, l. 2. =Agripennis= (_arapennis_, _arpent_), properly a
measure of surface. Here it is used of length, just as American
farmers use the term, _acre_, as a measure both of surface and of
length, meaning in the latter case the side of a square acre--about
70 yards. That this is the usage here may be proved by a simple
arithmetical operation.
[F] P. =10=, l. 12 f. For other exhibitions of extreme credulity, see
pp. 68, 171. It should be remembered that in these cases the point is
that Gregory is applying his theory of life to a concrete situation
in such a way that the contrast between the modern attitude and that
of the dark ages is brought out strongly. His view of the material
world was not one that laid any stress upon natural cause and effect,
but rather upon supernatural cause and natural effect. It is in
Gregory’s favor that he hears of more remarkable miracles than he
sees.
[G] P. =11.= Chapters 11-26 and 18-29 have been summarized. They
contain nothing of importance and their inclusion in full would be
solely at the expense of the reader’s patience.
[H] P. =12=, l. 11. 251 A.D.
[I] P. =12=, l. 16 f. Dionysius had the advantage, not apparent
until long after his lifetime, of being sent to Paris. His cult rose
with the city and he became the patron saint of France, his worship
centering in the abbey of St. Denis, founded within half a century of
Gregory’s death. In the ninth century St. Denis was boldly identified
with Dionysius the Areopagite and with the mystical theological
writings mistakenly attributed to the latter. This identification
affected the development of French theological thinking for eight
centuries. See Molinier, _Sources de l’Histoire de France_, Nos. 65,
816.
[J] P. =14=, l. 1. The reference is to the temple built in honor of
Mercurius Dumias (Mercury of the Dôme) on Puy-de-Dôme, the dominating
peak among the mountains about Gregory’s native place. He had no
doubt frequently visited it. For the term _Vasso Galatae_, see
_Art._, _Vassocaletis_ in _Alt-Celtischer Sprachschatz_, edited by A.
Hohler.
[K] P. =15=, l. 3. Cf. note to p. 6.
[L] P. =16=, l. 4. St. Martin died in 397. His fame in later ages is
largely due to the life written about 400 by his disciple Sulpicius
Severus. This work had a large circulation in Gaul and became a model
for saints’ lives. It is full of miracles and Gregory’s _Miracles
of St. Martin_ is merely a continuation of it. The best edition of
Severus’ works is by Hahn, Vienna, 1866.
[M] P. =16=, l. 38. For a similar case of “taboo of the threshold,”
see p. 200. The custom of taking a corpse out by some other opening
than the ordinary door is widely spread among primitive peoples. Cf.
_Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics_, edited by J. Hastings, _Art._,
_Death_.
[N] P. =21=, l. 28. Cf. _Notes_ on p. 6, l. 36 and p. 16, l. 4.
Sulpicius Severus wrote also an epitome of sacred history from the
creation of the world down to 400 A.D. The best edition is _La
Chronique de Sulpice Sévère_, by A. Lavertrujon, Paris, 1896.
[O] P. =21=, c. 1. The source of the story of Bricius is unknown.
A _Brictio_, described as a man of bad character, is mentioned by
Sulpicius Severus (_Dialogi_, 3) and by Venantius Fortunatus.
[P] P. =24=, l. 4. The Vandals invaded Gaul in 406 and moved on to
Spain in 409 and across to Africa in 427 or 428.
[Q] P. =24=, l. 7 f. The conception of war at this time was largely
that the side with the strongest supernatural backing would win. As
the supernatural forces on each side could be tested easily by a
battle of champions, it was natural that this should be resorted to
occasionally, at least in legend. Cf. _Introd._, p. xxiv. See also p.
230.
[R] P. =26=, l. 1. To Gregory’s mind the burning of the city of Metz
was of interest mainly because it brought out this conclusion. See
also l. 37 below.
[S] P. =27=, c. 9. The historians, Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus and
Sulpicius Alexander, are known only by the quotations given here. The
elaborate method of citing authorities found in this chapter does
not occur anywhere else in the _History of the Franks_.
[T] P. =31=, l. 23. =In consolaribus legimus.= Nothing further is
known of this source. If the following sentences are also drawn from
it, it is plain that its writer speaks as one living to the north of
the Loire before the conquest of that country by the Franks. Monod,
_Sources de l’histoire mérovingienne_, p. 85.
[U] P. =33=, c. 14-16. For Merovingian church architecture see
Enlart, _Archéologie française_, vol. 1, ch. 2. No trace of the
churches mentioned by Gregory survives.
[V] P. =36=, c. 22. Sidonius Apollinaris (d. 480), the leading
literary man of his time in Gaul, was bishop of Clermont the last
ten years of his life. Gregory’s work on the masses written by him
is lost. Although Gregory was born more than fifty years after
Sidonius’ death, he speaks in this intimate way of the former bishop
of the place of his birth. On Sidonius see Dill, _Society in the Last
Century of the Roman Empire_, c. iv. Sidonius’ _Letters_ have just
been translated by R. M. Dalton, Oxford, 1915.
[W] P. =36=, c. 27 f. For an acute analysis of the literary and oral
origins of Gregory’s account of Clovis, see Kurth, _Les sources de
l’histoire de Clovis_ (Revue des quest. hist., 1888).
[X] P. =37=, l. 33. =Campus Martius.= The March-field, later changed
to the May-field, _campus Madius_, the annual assembly of the Franks.
[Y] P. =41=, l. 8. =Sigamber=, one of the Sigambri, a German tribe
forming a section of the Frankish people.
[Z] P. =41=, l. 16. From the number Gregory reports as having been
baptized, possibly an exaggeration in itself, we can see that Clovis’
army was relatively small.
[AA] P. =44=, l. 8. The _Lex Gundobada_, still in existence (Mon.
Germ. Hist., Legum, Sect. I, Legum Nationum Germ. tomi II, pars
1), is a codification of Burgundian custom. Gundobad also issued
a code for his Roman subjects. The object of his legislation
was largely to secure a better understanding between Romans and
Burgundians. Cf. Lavisse, _Histoire de France_, II, p. 88 f. For
bibliographical references see R. Schroeder, _Lehrbuch der deutschen
Rechtsgeschichte_ (1902), p. 241.
[AB] P. =45=, l. 4. See Introduction, pp. xviii and xxii.
[AC] P. =46=, l. 35 f. The battle of Vouillé was fought in 507. The
people of Auvergne, led by Apollinaris, son of Sidonius Apollinaris
(p. 36), fought on the side of the Visigoths.
[AD] P. =47=, l. 29. =Et ab ea die tanquam consul aut Augustus est
vocitatus.= The opinion is held that it was an honorary consulship
to which Clovis was appointed. Cf. Pfister, in _Cambridge Mediaeval
History_, vol. II, p. 115.
[AE] P. =49=, l. 29 f. Cf. p. 50, l. 17 f. According to the
description of Clovis he was entirely emancipated from the clan
morality which was so powerful among the Franks of his time.
[AF] P. =53=, l. 36. The case of Gundobad is hardly to the point,
since he enjoyed a long and prosperous reign and left his kingdom to
his son Sigismund. See also note on p. 44.
[AG] P. =54=, l. 6 f. For a map showing this division see Longnon’s
_Atlas_. Theodoric had his capital at Rheims and held Auvergne,
Clodomer held Tours and Poitiers and made Orleans his capital.
Childebert had Paris, and Clothar, Soissons, for his capital. Note
that all divided equally, Theodoric the son of a concubine (p. 38)
with the rest.
[AH] P. =54=, l. 22. Theodoric the Great, king of the Ostrogoths
(475-526).
[AI] P. =55=, l. 13 f. See p. 38.
[AJ] P. =56=, l. 21. _Cf._ p. 54. Hermenfred had “forgotten” to
reward Theodoric. The atrocities of the Thuringians are mentioned
only here.
[AK] P. =57=, l. 3. =Ecce verbum directum habemus.= Cf. p. 84, l. 8,
_Verbum enim directum non habemus_. The _verbum directum_ was not
justification to public opinion but to the supernatural powers. Cf.
p. 45, 4 f. and _Introd._ pp. xxiv-xxv.
[AL] P. =59=, l. 2. Vitry in Champagne.
[AM] P. =60=, c. 15. This story is from Gregory’s family tradition.
The bishop of Langres was Gregory’s great-grandfather and Attalus was
a relative. Trèves was in Theodoric’s territory (Longnon, p. 368),
so that Attalus must have been a hostage from Childebert. However,
Longnon (p. 209) gives reasons for the opinion that Langres also
belonged to Theodoric. In that case Attalus must have belonged to
some other city and must have gone to Gregory merely for protection.
For a contrary opinion see Bonnell, _Die Anfänge des Karolingischen
Hauses_, p. 204, Note 2.
[AN] P. =60=, l. 11. Note the use of the term barbarian (_barbarus_)
for Frank. See also p. 94, c. 35.
[AO] P. =62=, l. 8. Arndt remarks that the Meuse should certainly
have been named in this passage rather than the Moselle. The latter,
however, is the reading of all the Mss.
[AP] P. =64=, l. 9. The Frankish kings were “long-haired” (_reges
crinitos_) (p. 31). The alternative offered to queen Clotilda was to
countenance the degradation of her grandchildren from royal rank or
“to see them dead.”
[AQ] P. =66=, l. 7. The relation of godfather to godson was regarded
as of great importance. See _e.g._ p. 179, l. 10.
[AR] P. =66=, l. 13. Arles was probably taken by Theodobert about 534
and remained only a short time in his hands. Longnon, p. 434.
[AS] P. =67=, l. 33. For the “fast of the Ninevites,” see Jonah 3, 5.
[AT] P. =70=, c. 34. Professor J. W. Thompson (_Commerce of France in
the Ninth Century_, Journal of Political Economy, November, 1915, pp.
876-7) regards this merchant group as probably going back to a Roman
mercantile corporation. He is in error however in supposing that the
merchants lent money to the king on the occasion Gregory refers to.
[AU] P. =70=, c. 36. The Franks objected to being taxed not only
because they were originally tax-free, but because the payment of
taxes degraded them by placing them on a level with the conquered
Gallo-Romans. This explains the bitterness of the enmity to
Parthenius (_cf._ p. 177), who may be judged from other references
to him as a man intellectually at least much superior to the
environment he found in Theodobert’s kingdom. See S. Hellman’s
revision of Giesebrecht’s translation of the _History of the Franks_,
vol. 3, p. 169.
[AV] P. =75=, c. 2. Elsewhere (p. 220) we learn that Clothar
recognized the right not only of the clergy but of the people of
Tours to go tax-free. The story told in this chapter would indicate
that the bishop of Tours was the natural leader of the bishops of
Clothar’s kingdom. Cf. _Introd._, p. x.
[AW] P. =76=, l. 30-31. The meaning is that the native rulers
remained, there being a difference only in title.
[AX] P. =77=, c. 6. The principle that the king’s consent was
necessary to the choice of a bishop was just being established at
this time. The bishops seeing in this case what they thought a good
opportunity, wished to disregard it, but Cato would not consent to
the scheme, believing that the king’s consent was demanded by the
canons. Gregory appears to have sympathized strongly with the effort
of the bishops. The selection of Cautinus in the way described was
even more irregular than the proposed consecration of Cato.
[AY] P. =78=, l. 31. Theodovald reigned 548-555.
[AZ] P. =82=, l. 8. Cautinus was illiterate. Cf. _Introd._, p. xiii.
[BA] P. =82=, c. 13. Chramnus’ stay at Clermont must have come soon
after king Theodovald’s death (555). At this time Gregory would be
seventeen or eighteen years old.
[BB] P. =82=, l. 11 f. Brioude was about 40 miles from Clermont up
the valley of the Allier. In it was St. Julian’s church.
[BC] P. =82=, l. 30. Note the use of the term _rex_ as applied to
Chramnus, who was merely an heir of king Clothar. So _regina_ is
applied to a king’s daughter (p. 138, l. 35).
[BD] P. =83=, l. 16. Sallust, _Catilina_, c. 3. Note this apt
citation.
[BE] P. =83=, l. 23. It was the custom for the Frankish king on his
accession to make a circuit of his kingdom and receive the allegiance
of his people. Cf. pp. 174, 220.
[BF] P. =84=, l. 37. =Prima haec est et magna generatio.= Gregory’s
mother’s family. _Introd._, pp. xi-xii.
[BG] P. =85=, l. 27 f. For St. Martin’s church see pp. 33-34, and for
the cathedral church, p. 247.
[BH] P. =86=, l. 33. “Alas!” is a weak translation of the
ejaculation, _Wa!_
[BI] P. =87=, l. 7. “In the kingdom of Burgundy we find the title
_patricius_ as that of an official who governed the part of Provence
which was attached to Burgundy and also appears to have held the
chief military command in that kingdom,” Pfister in _Cambridge
Medieval History_, II, p. 137.
[BJ] P. =91=, l. 10. =Gaganus= (Khan), not a proper name.
[BK] P. =93=, l. 34. Cf. Gregory’s own experience to illustrate this,
_Introd._, pp. xi-xii, xx.
[BL] P. =95=, c. 40. This chapter, summarized because outside of
the main interest of the narrative, has been examined as a test of
Gregory’s information as to the Eastern empire. The information is
found valuable though not exact. A. Carrière in _Annuaire de l’école
pratique des hautes études_, 1898.
[BM] P. =95=, c. 41. The Lombards entered Italy from the northeast
in 568. Their first invasion of Gaul from Italy and the defeat of
the patrician Amatus took place in 569. The most complete account of
these events is given by Paul the Deacon, _Historia Langobardorum_,
Lib. II, edition by Bethmann und Waitz (Mon. Germ. Hist.), 1878.
[BN] P. =96=, l. 31. The Saxons had accompanied the Lombards in their
original invasion of Italy. They were now proposing to return to
their former homes by another route.
[BO] P. =98=, l. 6. =Ex hoc quasi honoratus habitus.= “Being regarded
in consequence of this as in a sense _honoratus_.” _Honoratus_ here
seems to be used in a general meaning rather than in the technical
one of a man who holds or has held high office. Cf. Du Cange, _Art.,
Honorati_.
[BP] P. =98=, l. 14. Verg. _Aen._ III, 56, 57.
[BQ] P. =98=, l. 17. =Judex loci.= The _vicarius_ or subordinate of
the Count.
[BR] P. =99=, l. 29. This omen pointed to Sigibert’s death.
[BS] P. =100=, l. 20 f. The idea of conveying property by will
was foreign to the Franks and was not received into their law,
which regarded the family rather than the individual. On the other
hand conveying property by will was a regular practice among the
Gallo-Roman population. The church was often made a legatee, a
practice due in part to the desire to have its interest involved in
the carrying out of the will. Therefore in the conflicts that arose
in regard to succession to property the interests of the church and
of the state were naturally opposed.
[BT] P. =105=, l. 35. Orosius, V, 8.
[BU] P. =106=, l. 13. After Clothar’s death in 561 Charibert I became
master of Tours. When he died in 567 Tours was allotted to Sigibert,
who had however to drive Clovis, son of Chilperic, away before he
took possession. In 573 Chilperic again took possession but was
obliged to retire. Sigibert then held the city until his death in
575, after which Chilperic took it and held it to 584, when it passed
into the hands of Gunthram and after three years, by the treaty of
Andelot, into those of Childebert II.
[BV] P. =106=, l. 15. Merovech’s mother was Audovera (p. 90).
[BW] P. =108=, l. 9. Theodobert, son of Chilperic and Audovera.
Gregory tells us nothing of the manner of his death. Cf. pp. 90,
114-118.
[BX] P. =108=, l. 21. The nails were probably large spikes. Iron was
scarce and the people of Mans could make use of it in many ways,
especially for making knives. It may be remembered in this connection
how the barbarians tore out the clamps which the Roman masons used
to hold the stones together, as in the case of the _Porta Nigra_ at
Trèves.
[BY] P. =108=, l. 31. St. Martin’s church was “550 paces” from the
city of Tours (p. 36). Each of these “paces” is 4 ft. 10.248 in. and
the whole distance slightly over half a mile.
[BZ] P. =108=, l. 25. =Regio morbo=, jaundice.
[CA] P. =109=, l. 3 f. Felix was bishop of Nantes from 549 to 583.
He was the builder of a large church and undertook embankment
improvements on the Loire in Nantes. His relations with Gregory
appear to have been usually bad. Cf. pp. 76, 154-5. For poems
addressed to Felix by Fortunatus see _Carmina_, III, 4-10; V, 7
(edition by Leo in Mon. Germ. Hist.).
[CB] P. =109=, l. 11. Tetricus died in 572. It was in 573 that
Gregory became bishop of Tours.
[CC] P. =109=, l. 21. =Creditor=, business agent.
[CD] P. =109=, l. 21. It is of interest that Gregory’s own brother
was accused of the practice of “evil arts” (_maleficiis_). Cf.
_Introd._, p. xix.
[CE] P. =110=, l. 6. Probably Alais. This bishopric probably became
part of that of Nîmes. Longnon, pp. 538-543.
[CF] P. =111=, l. 38. =Libri IV de Virtutibus S. Martini.= See
_Introd._, pp. xvi and pp. 254-260.
[CG] P. =112=, l. 32 f. This tale indicates one kind of limitation
under which the profession of medicine labored at this time. Another
is revealed in the tales of healing undertaken in connection with
“evil arts” (pp. 205-8, 236-8). In the light of these passages the
fate of the physician Marileif (pp. 115, 181-2) is the natural one.
See also p. 131 and _Introd._, pp. xxii-xxiii.
[CH] P. =113=, l. 3. A characteristic opinion. See _Introd._, pp.
xvii-xviii.
[CI] P. =116=, l. 15. “On its right bank” (_in dextera eius parte_).
Tours was wholly on the left bank of the Loire.
[CJ] P. =116=, l. 22. Cf. _Introd._, p. xix.
[CK] P. =116=, l. 28. Note the terms of the prophecy and the
statement that it was fulfilled. Chilperic was, however, succeeded
by his son Clothar, who outlived Gregory. The doubts expressed as to
Clothar’s legitimacy may have been inspired by this prophecy. See S.
Hellman, in _Hist. Zeit._ vol. 107, p. 27 f.
[CL] P. =117=, l. 1 f. For another glimpse of Frankish hunting see p.
235.
[CM] P. =118=, l. 18. This is the earliest occurrence of the word
_Austrasii_. Longnon, p. 193.
[CN] P. =119=, l. 4. A more or less general custom among the early
Germans, described by Tacitus, _Germania_, 31.
[CO] P. =119=, c. 15. Chilperic’s enmity to Praetextatus, bishop
of Rouen, arose from the latter’s favor for Merovech, Chilperic’s
rebellious son. It was at Rouen that Merovech married Brunhilda. The
legal side of the trial is hard to follow, the main interest lying in
Gregory’s spirited resistance to Chilperic. How Chilperic would have
described it might be another story.
[CP] P. =120=, l. 29 f. From Sulpicius Severus’ life of St. Martin.
See note on p. 16, l. 4.
[CQ] P. =127=, l. 4 f. The boys were to die in fulfilment of the
prophecy on p. 116. See also p. 141.
[CR] P. =128=, l. 2. =Chilpericus … bannos jussit exigi.= _Bannus_
here means the fine for failure to obey the king’s _ban_ (order)
requiring the service of all inhabitants. Brunner, _Deutsche
Rechtsgeschichte_, vol. II, 1, p. 34.
[CS] P. =128=, l. 11. The term translated “acre” (_arapennis_) is in
reality only five-sixteenths of an acre. This part of Chilperic’s
decree must refer only to vineyard land.
[CT] P. =129=, l. 33 f. The reference may be to children of Gregory’s
niece who lived at Tours. Cf. p. 115.
[CU] P. =131=, l. 16. Gregory’s comment has provoked discussion. It
should be borne in mind that to Gregory the keeping of an oath was
an essential, that his attitude toward practitioners of medicine was
hostile, and that Gunthram was a favorite.
[CV] P. =132=, l. 24. Hilarius of Poitiers and Eusebius of Vercellae
(_Liber in Gloria Confessorum_, 2, 3), two champions of orthodoxy.
[CW] P. =133=, l. 8. Sedulius (first half of the fifth century), a
Christian poet who composed a metrical account of Biblical history.
[CX] P. =133=, l. 12. This passage may be taken for evidence that
Gregory did not know the Greek alphabet.
[CY] P. =133=, l. 28. The mayor of the palace was regularly tutor
(_nutricius_) of a king under age. Pfister in _Cambridge Medieval
History_, vol. II, p. 136.
[CZ] P. =135=, l. 8. See note on p. 106.
[DA] P. =138=, l. 11. The church of St. Medard at Soissons. Braine is
a short distance away.
[DB] P. =138=, l. 35. Perhaps Riguntha, daughter of Chilperic and
Fredegunda, sympathized with Gregory out of enmity for her mother.
Cf. p. 221.
[DC] P. =140=, l. 6. We hear of this local jealousy between Clermont
and Tours also at p. 137; another more serious inter-city feud is
described on p. 172.
[DD] P. =148=, l. 4. The recluse Hospicius had had himself immured in
a tower. He had a window in it, but the only way to gain access to
him was to take off the roof. For other recluses see pp. 151, 158,
199.
[DE] P. =150=, l. 11 f. The interpretation of this passage is that
the worms were demons or sent by demons to plague the holy man.
[DF] P. =152=, l. 11. =Inter senatores sophisticos ac judices
philosophicos.= This passage illustrates the difference in culture at
this time between Paris and southern Gaul.
[DG] P. =152=, l. 22. The earliest mention of the office. In
Gregory’s time the _major domo_ was of domestic rather than of
political importance. Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_ (1892),
vol. II, p. 104.
[DH] P. =154=, l. 2. For another observation of a comet, see p. 92.
[DI] P. =158=, l. 8. Gundulf is a great-uncle of Gregory on his
mother’s side. _Hist. Franc._ VI, 11. It is worth while remarking
that he has a barbarian name. Gregory had found it convenient to
discard his own name for one more closely associated with the
episcopal office, and Gundulf on his side may have had a similar
motive.
[DJ] P. =158=, c. 27. This agreement is referred to on p. 173 also.
It was made by Chilperic, Gunthrum, and Sigibert in dividing the
kingdom of Charibert in 567. Longnon, pp. 348-353.
[DK] P. =159=, l. 1. In the division of Frankish territory following
Clothar’s death, the territory of Marseilles was divided between
Gunthram and Sigibert. When Sigibert died, Gunthram took the whole.
Childebert II is here claiming his father’s share.
[DL] P. =159=, l. 7. Gregory attributes the assassination of Sigibert
to Fredegunda (p. 100).
[DM] P. =159=, l. 17. Bourges belonged to Gunthram; Tours, Poitiers,
Angers, Nantes, to Chilperic.
[DN] P. =162=, l. 15. The Mummolus mentioned here is a different
person from Mummolus the patrician. See _Index_.
[DO] P. =162=, l. 26. Gregory’s attitude toward the story in
general is not skeptical; but he regarded the diabolical powers as
always deceitful. Cf. p. 116: “What the devil promises is not to be
believed.”
[DP] P. =163=, l. 29. To take Riguntha as bride of the king of Spain.
[DQ] P. =164=, l. 29. This should be regarded as a tax rather than as
a free-will offering. Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_, vol. II,
p. 70.
[DR] P. =166=, l. 3. See note on p. 133.
[DS] P. =169=, l. 30. =Nimia excesus abstinentia.= The translation
of these words is difficult. _Excesus_ may be taken as _excisus_
(_ex_, _caedere_). _Caedere_ is frequently used in Gregory’s writings
in the sense of _flog_. The compound however does not appear to be
found elsewhere in Gregory, and Bonnet, p. 422, note 1, suggests for
_excesus_, _exesus_ (devoured, consumed), which however does not give
a plausible meaning.
[DT] P. =170=, l. 1. =Eoglogias= (_eulogiae_). Blessed or consecrated
bread, not the eucharist. Bingham, _Christian Antiquities_, vol. V,
186 f.
[DU] P. =171=, l. 32. Sallust, _Catilina_, c. 3.
[DV] P. =173=, l. 12 f. See pp. 119, 145.
[DW] P. =175=, l. 13. Duke Desiderius had been in the service of
Chilperic; he now joined the pretender Gundovald.
[DX] P. =175=, l. 30. The occasion is described on pp. 158-160.
[DY] P. =175=, c. 14. This chapter furnishes a good example of the
way in which their “sacred character” protected legates. The outward
symbol of this “character” was a “consecrated wand.” _Hist. Franc._
VII, 32.
[DZ] P. =176=, l. 11. Du Cange defines _Ballomer_ as _falsus dominus,
pseudo-princeps_. It is regarded as a word of Frankish origin with
termination in _-mer_, like _Clodomer_.
[EA] P. =177=, l. 9 f. The meaning of this probably is that Leonard
was stripped of the insignia of office which he had retained.
Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_, vol. II, p. 81, Note.
[EB] P. =178=, l. 18. Gunthram appears here more as the avenger of
his kinsman according to the old custom than as king with a new order
of justice at his hand. Cf. Brunner, vol. I, p. 325 (edition of 1906).
[EC] P. =178=, l. 35. The reference is probably to the estates
granted (_commendatum_) to him by the king.
[ED] P. =181=, l. 9. The vicar (also _tribunus_, _judex loci_) was
an officer subordinate to the count. Injuriosus had been obliged to
borrow money, having either failed to collect the taxes in full or
spent the money otherwise.
[EE] P. =182=, c. 29. The interest of this chapter lies in the
vivid manner in which the fear of St. Martin is depicted as a
present reality to the people of the time. A Frank named Claudius
was commissioned by king Gunthram to destroy Eberulf, a political
refugee, without violating St. Martin’s sanctuary. “As he travelled
along [to Tours] Claudius, according to the custom of the barbarians,
began to watch the signs and say they were unfavorable to him, and
at the same time to ask many persons if the power of the blessed
Martin was shown at the present time on those who broke faith; he
particularly wanted to know whether St. Martin’s vengeance followed
immediately in case any one attacked persons who put their faith
in him.” On arriving at Tours Claudius ingratiated himself with
Eberulf and promised him help, and when the latter “saw that Claudius
made such promises on oath in the very church and at its entrance
and in every part of the court-yard [_atrium_], the ill-fated man
believed the perjurer.” The next day a feast was held in the church
and Claudius secured Eberulf’s confidence to such a degree that the
latter relaxed his guard. “He sent his men one after another to get
strong wine, Italian wine, of course, and Syrian wine.” This took
place in the courtyard of the church. Claudius was now in a dilemma.
“He was purposing to kill Eberulf in the courtyard, but he was afraid
of the power of the holy bishop.” However, the chance was too good
to be lost. Eberulf was slain by Claudius and his men, but Eberulf’s
followers immediately appeared and there was a fierce battle in and
about the monastery in the courtyard. “The poor, both those who
received the regular doles, and others” took part. “Those who were
‘possessed’ and the beggars hurried from here and there with stones
and clubs to avenge the insult done to the church.” Claudius and
his men were all slain. Thus “the vengeance of God had immediately
overtaken the men who had polluted the holy courtyard with human
blood. Moreover, Eberulf’s wickedness is perceived to be not slight
when the blessed bishop (Martin) allowed him to meet such a fate.”
The whole incident was regarded by Gregory, who was absent at the
time “at a country place about thirty miles from the city,” as a
vindication of St. Martin.
[EF] P. =184=, l. 21. For an account of the arms and armor of the
period see L. Beck, _Geschichte des Eisens_, vol. I, pp. 703-728
(1884).
[EG] P. =186=, c. 47. This feud, the sequel of which is given in Book
IX, c. 19, is of some interest in the study of the criminal law of
the period, but is told by Gregory in a somewhat tangled way, so that
it seems best to summarize the main points in a note. A company who
were celebrating Christmas were invited by a priest “to go to his
house, to drink.” Evidently they had been drinking too much already,
for one of them, Austrighysel, drew his sword and killed the priest’s
slave who brought the message. Thereupon the feud began. Another
of the company, Sichar, “who was on terms of friendship with the
priest,” attacked Austrighysel at the church door, but the latter was
forewarned and his party, killing Sichar’s servants, made off with
his gold and silver and other property, Sichar himself escaping in
the confusion. The case came before a court of citizens (_in judicio
civium_) which gave judgment against Austrighysel, who was to pay
the fine for homicide and for taking property without warrant. But
Sichar, in the true spirit of a feudist, did not wait for this
judgment. Learning where the property was kept, he took an armed
band, murdered all in the house where the treasure was, and even
carried off the flocks and herds. “On hearing this,” says Gregory,
“we were greatly vexed and in conjunction with the judge we sent
messengers to them to come to our presence and make a reasonable
settlement and depart in peace, that the quarrel might not breed
greater trouble.” Gregory even offered to advance the church’s money
to pay the fine of the guilty one, if the latter had not money
himself. But Chramsind, the representative of the family Sichar had
murdered in the last incident, refused to accept settlement, and
hearing later a false report that Sichar had been killed by one of
his own slaves, he took up the feud anew, “summoned his kinsmen and
friends,” plundered Sichar’s house, and killed all the slaves on his
estate. The settlement of this tangled feud is extremely interesting,
since it shows how the courts of the period were straining every
effort to overcome the time-honored custom of the blood feud. “Then
the two parties were summoned before the judge in the city and
pleaded their causes, and the verdict was found by the judges that
he [Chramsind] who had been unwilling to accept a money payment
before and had burned the houses, should lose half of the award which
[otherwise] would have been adjudged to him,--this was done contrary
to the law if only peace could be restored--but Sichar was to pay
the other half of the fine. Then the church gave money to the amount
of the verdict; Sichar paid his fine and received a receipt for it,
each party swearing to the other that at no time should one party go
muttering things against the other. And thus the strife ended.” It
did not end, however, as the nineteenth chapter of the ninth book
shows.
[EH] P. =189=, c. 1-7. For a discussion of Gregory’s attitude
toward Gunthram see S. Hellmann, _Studien zur mittelalterlichen
Geschichtschreibung_, Hist. Zeit., vol. 107, p. 23 f.
[EI] P. =189=, l. 6. Gunthram was frequently threatened with
assassination. See pp. 174, 176, 178, 205. On this occasion he seems
to have felt more confidence.
[EJ] P. =189=, l. 20. The Syrians were the distributors of eastern
Mediterranean commodities in Gaul. The name seems to have been
applied to a number of eastern peoples. In this connection it may be
recalled that a Syrian, Eusebius, was bishop of Paris, and another,
Theodore of Tarsus, archbishop of Canterbury.
[EK] P. =191=, l. 1. Gunthram had held Saintes from 567 to 576, when
it was taken from him by Chilperic’s son Clovis.
[EL] P. =197=, l. 20. =Daemonii meridiani instinctu.= Cf. _Interea
accedentibus hariolis et dicentibus eum meridiani daemonii
incursionem pati_ (_De Virtut. S. Martin._ IV, 36). A sudden seizure
in the heat of the day would be diagnosed as possession by a mid-day
demon.
[EM] P. =198=, l. 22 f. See Frazer, _Golden Bough_, vol. 8, p. 280,
for an explanation of this matter. An image of a noxious creature was
supposed to rid a locality of it.
[EN] P. =206=, l. 2. =Errore nigromantici ingenii.= The spelling of
_nigromantici_ reveals a popular etymology (_niger_), “the black
art.” Cf. Bonnet, p. 218.
[EO] P. =207=, l. 7. The “imposter” had to conduct a service
containing responses all by himself.
[EP] P. =209=, l. 34. The meaning of this is that in his pain and
excitement Gunthram Boso thought he had a lance in his hand instead
of a sword.
[EQ] P. =210=, c. 15. This assembly of the Arian bishops of Spain
took place in 587.
[ER] P. =211=, l. 12. The reference is to the Latin version (and
continuation) of Eusebius’ history by Rufinus. Book X, c. 14.
[ES] P. =212=, l. 2. According to the Salic law the fine which the
killing of a free man entailed was more than doubled if the corpse
was concealed.
[ET] P. =212=, l. 21. The purpose of the letter was to certify that
Chramsind was not an outlaw and could not be attacked with impunity
by Sichar’s kinsmen.
[EU] P. =212=, l. 36. In the agreement there are two separate
statements about Senlis, the first (p. 213, l. 34), that “Childebert
asserts his right from the present day to two-thirds of Senlis,”
the second (p. 215, l. 6), that “it is agreed that Childebert shall
hold Senlis in entirety, and as far as the third therein due to lord
Gunthram is concerned, he shall be compensated by the third belonging
to lord Childebert which is in Ressons.”
[EV] P. =215=, l. 9. Ressons-sur-le-Matz, not far from Senlis. Cf.
Longnon, p. 416.
[EW] P. =216=, l. 30. It was as the head of the Merovingian clan that
Gunthram’s consent was required.
[EX] P. =216=, l. 32. Ingunda had married Reccared’s elder brother
who rebelled against his father and was finally executed. Ingunda
died shortly after on her way to Constantinople.
[EY] P. =217=, l. 1. Childebert had already made two expeditions
against the Lombards. Cf. pp. 163, 197.
[EZ] P. =218=, l. 10. The agreement was made Nov. 8, 588 at Andelot.
[FA] P. =218=, l. 16. Gregory’s idea of a good king is that he
approximates to a bishop. Cf. _Introd._, p. xvii.
[FB] P. =220=, c. 30. This chapter contains the history of taxation
in Tours in Gregory’s day. The exemption enjoyed by Tours must have
brought it some rich inhabitants. On the other hand the fact that
political refugees fled to St. Martin’s church for protection was
sometimes a disadvantage. Cf. p. 117.
[FC] P. =221=, l. 25. =Genetricemque suam servitio redeberit.= The
translation of this passage is difficult. Bonnet, p. 668, _note_,
suggests _redhiberet_ for _redeberit_, in which case the meaning
would be that Rigunda would make Fredegunda a slave again, as she had
been before marrying Chilperic.
[FG] P. =222=, l. 6. Wife of duke Launebod, who built the church of
St. Saturninus at Toulouse.
[FH] P. =222=, l. 8. For Waddo see pp. 165, 182-185. He had been
count of Saintes, and it was probably from the territory of Saintes
that he made this expedition.
[FI] P. =223=, l. 11. The story of the forty nuns is told with
burdensome detail. The sequel of the story with the review of the
case by the bishops (Book X, Chaps. 15-17) is translated.
[FJ] P. =227=, l. 16. Pope Gregory the Great, 590-604. This chapter
gives the only contemporary information about him not given in his
own writings.
[FK] P. =228=, l. 10. Pope Gregory had lived in Constantinople from
579 to 585.
[FL] P. =228=, l. 23 f. It was a custom for the bishop to resist
election, in appearance at least.
[FM] P. =228=, l. 31. Carthage was so called to distinguish it from
Carthage in Spain (Cartagena).
[FN] P. =232=, l. 18. The _vicarius_ was an officer subordinate to
the count.
[FO] P. =232=, c. 7. The reference seems to be wholly to back taxes
due from the church.
[FP] P. =233=, c. 8. This is a tale from Gregory’s home town. He
must have known personally some at least of the persons mentioned.
The time of the incidents may be inferred from these facts: Bishop
Cautinus died in 571; duke Desiderius died about 587, and Gregory is
writing between 590 and 592.
[FQ] P. =235=, l. 11. 590 A.D.
[FR] P. =235=, c. 10. In this case the trial by combat yielded no
verdict. Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_, vol. II, p. 440
(edition of 1892).
[FS] P. =244=, l. 32. The “swarm of flies” was the medium through
which this man became “possessed.” In _De Virtut. S. Martin_, I, c.
53, a cloud of dust has the same effect. Cf. also _De Virtut. S.
Martin_, III, c. 16, 20.
[FT] P. =245=, l. 19. =Episcopis ac civibus.= The meaning of the last
word may be “people of the _civitas_ (city),” _i.e._ “townsfolk.”
[FU] P. =246=, l. 3. See _Note_ on p. 189, l. 20.
[FV] P. =246=, l. 23 f. A similar case of summary punishment is found
on p. 199. Cf. also pp. 38, 48-50, 176.
[FW] P. =246=, l. 36. The cathedral church in the city. Below (p.
247, l. 21 f.) the reference is to St. Martin’s church.
[FX] P. =247=, l. 13. The reference is to a legend dating back to
the time of the emperor Maximian (285-310) and centering about St.
Maurice (cf. p. 54). The legion, consisting wholly of Christians
from the East, was commanded to take part in the persecution of
the Christians. On its refusal its members were executed to a man.
The question of the authenticity of the legend has given rise to a
long controversy. See _Art._, _Theban Legion_, _New Schaff-Herzog
Religious Encyclopedia_.
[FY] P. =247=, l. 32 f. Appeals of this sort are common in the
literature of the age. Compare the following: “I adjure thee, who
shalt transcribe this book, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by his
glorious appearing, when he comes to judge the living and the dead,
that thou compare what thou has transcribed, and be careful to set it
right according to this copy from which thou hast transcribed; also
that thou in like manner copy down this adjuration, and insert it in
the transcript.” Irenaeus, _De Ogdoade_ (_Ante-Nicene Fathers_, vol.
I, p. 568).
[FZ] P. =248=, l. 2. Martianus Capella wrote, about 450, a work on
the seven liberal arts much used in medieval schools. Cf. _Introd._,
p. xiii.
GENEALOGY OF MEROVINGIAN KINGS
(Mentioned in the History of the Franks)
Clogio
|
Merovech
|
Childeric
d. 481
|
Clovis
d. 511
|
+-----------+-----+-----+------------+
| | | |
Theodoric I Clodomer Childebert I Clothar I
d. 534 d. 524 d. 558 d. 561
| |
Theodobert I +----------+-----------++-------------+
d. 548 | | | |
| Charibert I Gunthram Chilperic Sigibert
Theodobald d. 567/8 d. 592 m. Fredegunda m. Brunhilda
d. 555 d. 584 d. 575
| |
Clothar II Childebert II
d. 629 d. 595
|
+-----------+-+
| |
Theodobert II Theodoric II
d. 612 d. 613
FAMILIES OF CLOTHAR AND OF CHILPERIC
Clothar I, d. 561
m. 1) Guntheuca, Clodomer’s widow
2) Chunsina
3) Ingunda
4) Aregunda, Ingunda’s sister
5) Radegunda, daughter of Thuringian king Berthar;
became a nun at Poitiers about 550
6) A concubine
7) Vuldetrada, Theodovald’s widow (p. 79)
|
+----+-----+-----+-----+------+-------+------+-----+
| | | | | | | | |
2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 6
Chrammus | Childeric | Gunthram | Clotsinda | Gundovald
d. 560 | d. 561 | d. 592 | m. Lombard | (not
| | | king | recognized)
| | | |
| | | |
3 3 3 4
Gunthar Charibert I Sigibert Chilperic
d. before 561 d. 567/8 m. Brunhilda m. 1) Audovera
d. 575 2) Gaisuenta
3) Fredegunda
d. 584
|
+------+---+----+----+-----+---+----+-----+-----+
| | | | | | | | | |
1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Theodobert | Clovis | Riguntha | Samson | Theodoric |
d. 575 | d. 580 | | d. 577 | d. 584 |
| | | | |
| | | | |
1 1 3 3 3
Merovech Basina Clodobert Dagobert Clothar II
d. 577 nun at d. 580 d. 580 d. 629
Poitiers
(The numbers indicate the mothers, as given in the list.)
GREGORY’S FAMILY
Gregory, bishop of Langres Florentius
m. Armentaria m. Artemia
| |
+----------------+---------+------+ +------+-------+
| | | | | | |
Georgius, m. Leocadia | A Son A Son A Daughter | Gundulf
| | | | | | duke
| Tetricus, bishop of | +-----+--+ Nicetius, bishop
| Langres | | of Lyons
| Eufronius |
| Bishop of Tours |
| |
+---+---------------------+ |
| | |
Gallus, bishop of Clermont | |
Gorgius Florentinus, m.-+-Armentaria
|
+-------+-------+
| | |
Gregory, bishop | A Daughter
of Tours | m. Justinus
Peter, deacon |
at Langres |
|
+------+------+
| |
Justina Eusthenia
nun at Poitiers m. Nicetius
BIBLIOGRAPHY[98]
EDITIONS
ARNDT, W., et BR. KRUSCH, _Gregorii Turonensis Opera_. 1885. In
Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Displaces all previous editions.
OMONT, H., et G. COLLON, _Grégoire de Tours, Histoire des Francs,
Texte de manuscrits de Corbie et de Bruxelles_. New edition by
René Poupardin.[99] Paris, 1913. In _Collection de textes pour
servir à l’étude et l’enseignement de l’histoire_.
TRANSLATIONS
BORDIER, H. _Histoire ecclésiastique des Francs par saint Grégoire,
évêque de Tours_, Paris, 1859-61.
GIESEBRECHT, W. _Zehn Bücher fränkischer Geschichte vom Bischof
Gregorius von Tours._ Berlin, 1851. New edition, in 3 vols.
revised by S. Hellmann, 1913 (Geschichtschreiber der deutschen
Vorzeit). Only the last volume of the new edition has been
available.
GUADET, J., et TARANNE, N. R. _Histoire ecclésiastique des Francs
par Georges Florent Grégoire, évêque de Tours._ Paris, 1836.
GUIZOT, M. _Histoire des Francs par Grégoire de Tours._ Paris, 1823.
GENERAL
AMPÈRE, J. J. _Histoire littéraire de la France avant Charlemagne._
Paris, 1870.
BONNET, MAX. _Le Latin de Grégoire de Tours._ Paris, 1890. A work
indispensable to the reader of the Latin text.
CARRIÈRE, A. _Sur un chapitre de Grégoire de Tours relatif à
l’histoire d’Orient_ (Annuaire de l’école pratique des hautes
études), 1898.
DECLAREUIL, O. _Les épreuves judiciaires dans le droit franc du
Vᵉ au VIIIᵉ siècle._ Paris, 1899.
FAHLBECK, P. _La Royauté et le droit royal Francs (486-614).
Traduit par J. H. Kramer._ Lund, 1883.
GALY, C. _La famille à l’époque mérovingienne._ Paris, 1901.
HELLMANN, S. _Studien zur mittelalterlichen Geschichtschreibung._
I. _Gregor von Tours._ Hist. Zeitschrift. 1911.
HUGUEMIN, M. A. _Histoire du royaume Mérovingien d’Austrasie._
Paris, 1862.
JUNGHAUS, W. _Histoire critique des règnes de Childebert et de
Chlodovech; traduite par G. Monod._ Paris, 1879.
KRUSCH, B. _Zur Chronologie der merovingischen Könige_ (Forschungen
zur deutschen Geschichte), 1882.
KURTH, G. _Clovis._ Tours, 1891.
---- _De la nationalité des comtes francs_ (Mélanges Paul Fabre).
Paris, 1903.
---- _Histoire poétique des Mérovingiens._ Paris, 1893.
---- _Les ducs et les comtes d’Auvergne au VIᵉ siècle_ (Bull. de
l’Acad. roy. de Belgique), 1899.
---- _Les ducs et les comtes de Touraine au VIᵉ siècle_ (Bull. de
l’Acad. roy. de Belgique), 1906.
---- _Les sources de l’histoire de Clovis_ (Revue des quest. hist.),
1888.
---- _Sainte Clotilde._ Paris, 1897.
---- _Saint Grégoire de Tours et les études classiques au VIᵉ
siècle_ (Revue des quest. hist.), 1878.
LESNE, E. _La propriété ecclésiastique en France aux époques
romaine et mérovingienne._ Paris, 1910.
LOEBELL, J. W. _Gregor von Tours und seine Zeit._ Leipsic, 1869.
LONGNON, A. _Géographie de la Gaule au VIᵉ siècle._ Paris, 1878.
Indispensable to the reader of Gregory’s works. It is largely
a geographical commentary on the _History of the Franks_.
MARIGNAN, A. _Études sur la civilisation française._ Tome I. _La
société mérovingienne._ Tome II. _Le culte des saints sous les
Mérovingiens._
MONOD, G. _Les aventures de Sichaire_ (Revue Historique), 1886.
---- _Sources de l’histoire mérovingienne._ Paris, 1872.
PROU, M. _Examen de quelques passages de Grégoire de Tours relatifs
à l’application de la peine de mort_ (Études d’histoire du moyen
âge dediées à G. Monod). Paris, 1896.
---- _La Gaule mérovingienne._ Paris, 1897.
TARDIF, J. _Études sur les institutions politiques et administratives
de la France. Époque mérovingienne._ Paris, 1881.
THIERRY, AUG. _Récits des temps mérovingiens._ Paris, 1840.
URBAT, R. _Beitrage zu einer Darstellung der romanischen Elemente
im Latin der Historia Francorum des Gregor v. Tours._ Königsberg,
1890.
VAUCELLE, E. R. _La collégiale de saint Martin de Tours (397-1328)_.
Paris, 1908.
WEIMANN, K. _Die sittliche Begriffe in Gregor von Tours “Historia
Francorum.”_ Duisburg, 1900.
FOOTNOTES:
[98] Not exhaustive.
[99] A full list of editions and translations may be found in this
edition, pp. xxiv-xxx. The most famous of the early editions
is that by Th. Ruinart, Paris, 1699.
[Illustration: FRANKISH
DOMINIONS
A.D. 511-561
(Map)
Cambridge University Press W. & A.K. Johnston Lᵗᵈ
Reproduced by permission from _Cambridge Medieval History_, Vol. II.]
INDEX[100]
=Ætius=, 26.
=Alamanni=, Alemanni, 13, 30, 35, 39-40, 47.
=Alani=, 27, 30.
=Alaric=, 36, 44-47, 53.
=Albin=, king of the Lombards, 76, 95.
=Amalaric=, 47, 54, 58, 68.
=Anastasius=, 80.
=Andarchius=, 97-99.
=Andelot=, 213.
=Apollinaris= Sidonius, 36, 47, 80.
=Arcadius=, 64.
=Aregunda=, 75.
=Aregyselus=, 59.
=Arians=, 5, 24, 25, 41, 45, 53, 89, 131, 156, 210.
=Aridius=, 42.
=Arles=, 66, 89, 91, 237, 244.
=Attalus=, 60-63.
=Attila=, 26.
=Audovald=, Duke, 230.
=Austrasians=, 118.
=Austrechild=, xxii, 87, 130.
=Auvergne=, ix, xi, xiii, 44, 58, 63, 67, 85, 94, 232, 233-235, 250,
252.
=Avignon=, 42, 97, 152, 157, 158, 183, 191, 244.
=Avitus= the abbot, 55, 120, 190.
=Babylonia=, 8, 9.
=Basina=, 33.
=Basina=, daughter of Chilperic, 236-243.
=Belsuarius=, 69.
=Bertram=, bishop of Bordeaux, 121-124, 134-138, 190, 193, 194.
=Berulf=, Duke, 137, 159, 197.
=Bordeaux=, 47, 152, 163, 206, 214.
=Bourges=, 13, 35, 92, 139, 140, 159, 160, 163, 184, 185, 211, 244.
=Bretons=, 35, 76, 85, 86, 128, 211.
=Bricius=, 21-23.
=Brunhilda=, 89, 90, 99, 106, 115, 119, 122, 146, 178, 192, 208, 212,
213, 214.
=Buccelenus=, 69, 79.
=Burgundians=, 30, 31, 38, 44, 47, 55, 95-96.
=Cæsarea=, 6.
=Cæsaria=, 83.
=Cambrai=, 31, 49.
=Candes=, 15.
=Carthage=, 228-230.
=Cato=, the priest, 77-79, 84, 90, 92.
=Cautinus=, bishop of Clermont, 77-84, 90, 92, 233.
=Cellula= Sancti Maxentii, 46.
=Celsus=, the patrician, 87.
=Châlons= [sur-Saône], 131, 133, 189, 205, 212, 219, 235.
=Chararic=, 49.
=Charibert=, King, 75, 85, 87, 88, 116, 134, 135, 213, 220.
=Charigisil=, xxiii.
=Charigysel=, chamberlain of Sigibert, 100.
=Chedinus=, Duke, 231.
=Childebert=, son of Clovis, 54, 58, 60, 63-67, 69, 85, 99, 152.
=Childebert II=, son of Sigibert, 106, 122, 134, 145, 153, 158-160,
164, 173, 175, 191, 194, 197, 205, 208-220, 221, 238, 243.
=Childeric=, 31, 33, 35, 36.
=Chilperic=, King, xvi, xxv, 75, 87-166, 173, 174, 192.
=Chlogio=, 31.
=Chlotsinda=, 75, 95.
=Chonoober=, count of the Bretons, 85, 86.
=Chramnus=, 75, 79, 82, 83, 85, 86.
=Chrocus=, 13.
=Chrodield=, 236-243.
=Chrodinus=, 156.
=Chundo=, 235.
=Chuppa=, 232.
=Clermont=, ix, 12, 13, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 44, 47, 54, 66, 77-79,
82, 92, 97-98, 113, 158, 260.
=Cloderic=, 47.
=Clodomer=, 39, 54, 55, 56, 63-65, 69, 120.
=Clothar=, 54-58, 63-67, 69, 75, 79-88, 118, 130, 151-152, 157, 215,
220.
=Clothar=, son of Chilperic, 174, 189, 194, 217, 235, 246.
=Clotilda=, 38-41, 50, 55, 56, 63-65, 75, 80.
=Clovis=, xiv, xxii, xxiv, 31, 33, 36-50, 53, 54, 71, 76, 105.
=Clovis=, son of Chilperic, 90, 139, 194.
=Cologne=, 29, 48, 261.
=Cush=, 8.
=Deoteria=, 66-67.
=Desideratus=, bishop of Verdun, 67.
=Desiderius=, Duke, 114, 159, 160, 175, 185, 197, 201, 205-206, 233.
=Dijon=, 42, 44, 65, 85, 92, 110.
=Ebarchius= the recluse, 150-151.
=Eberulf=, 178-181, 182, 197.
=Egidius=, bishop of Rheims, 158-160, 175, 210, 243.
=Enoch=, 7.
=Erpo=, Duke, 118.
=Eufronius=, 84, 88, 139.
=Eulalius=, 233-235.
=Eusebius=, 6, 15, 21, 211.
=Eusebius= [of Vercellæ], 132.
=Farro=, 49.
=Fasti= Consulares, 31.
=Felix=, bishop of Nantes, 76, 109, 140, 154-155.
=Firmin=, 82.
=Flavian=, _domesticus_, 212, 232, 237.
=Franks=, 26-32, 56, 66, 84 _et passim_.
=Fredegunda=, 90, 100, 115, 116, 122, 130, 131, 161-163, 173-178,
186, 194, 197, 201, 216, 245.
=Gaganus= (Khan), 91.
=Galen=, 114, 125.
=Gallus=, xi, 77, 78, 82, 252-254, 260-262.
=Galsuenda=, 90, 214.
=Germanus=, bishop of Paris, 100, 112.
=Godomar=, 55-56.
=Gogo=, 133.
=Goths=, 26, 31, 35, 36, 37, 44, 46, 47, 66, 68, 89, 163-165.
=Gregory= of Tours, Education, xii.
Family, x, 109-111, 250-256, 260-262.
Life, ix.
Religion, xix.
Style, xiii, 1, 5, 254.
Superstition, xi, 10 _et passim_.
Works, xv, 119-124, 132, 134, 141, 194, 212-218, 247, 254.
=Gregory=, bishop of Langres, xi, 60, 63, 65, 84.
=Gregory=, the Great, 227.
=Grippo=, legate to the emperor, 228-232.
=Gundobad=, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 53.
=Gundovald=, 157, 175, 176, 182-184, 190.
=Gunthram=, King, 75, 85, 87, 89, 91, 109, 125, 145, 153, 156, 159,
173, 174, 175, 178, 180, 181, 182, 185, 189, 194, 205, 208-218,
220, 221, 238.
=Gunthram= Boso, 108, 114-118, 125, 127, 131, 157, 158, 175, 176,
183, 184, 197, 208-210, 219.
=Hermenfred=, 54, 56-58.
=Hilarius=, St., 15, 46, 53, 132, 173.
=Hospicius= the recluse, 147-150.
=Huns=, 25, 26, 87, 90.
=Ingoberga=, 87.
=Ingunda=, 75, 76.
=Injuriosus=, bishop of Tours, 75, 76.
=Jerome=, 6, 15, 21, 249.
=Jews=, 82, 113, 155, 181, 189.
=John=, the Pope, 126.
=Justina=, 236.
=Juvencus=, 15.
=Latium=, 66.
=Leo=, 60-63.
=Leocadius=, 13.
=Leonastus=, 112.
=Leudast=, 115, 134-140, 160-162.
=Leudeghisel=, 182-185.
=Limoges=, 128, 214.
=Loire=, 17.
=Lombards=, 76, 95-97, 217, 219, 220, 230.
=Lupus=, Duke, 145.
=Lyons=, 44, 55, 92, 94, 110, 145, 218.
=Macliavus=, 76, 119.
=Magnovald=, 199-200.
=Mans=, 108, 151, 244.
=Marcus= the referendary, 128, 130, 158.
=Marileif=, 115, 181, 182.
=Marseilles=, 41, 98, 109, 114, 145, 159, 218, 244.
=Martianus= [Capella], 248.
=Martin=, St., x, xii, xvi, xvii, xx, 14, 15-17, 21, 33-34, 67, 75,
85, 86, 111, 112, 115, 120, 152, 173, 178, 189, 193, 220, 221,
254, 256.
=Maxentius=, 46.
=Merovech=, 31.
=Merovech=, son of Chilperic, 90, 106, 114-118, 119, 123, 124, 125,
135, 194.
=Metz=, 25, 26, 78, 210, 212, 230.
=Milan=, 230.
=Mummolus= the patrician, 95-97, 114, 126, 157-158, 162-163, 172,
177, 183-185, 191.
=Munderic=, 58, 59, 60.
=Narses=, 69, 79.
=Nicæa=, 6.
=Nicetius=, bishop of Lyons, xi, 110, 125, 192.
=Nicetius=, husband of Gregory’s niece, 115.
=Nile=, 9.
=Noah=, 8.
=Orleans=, 26, 35, 55, 56, 87, 172, 178, 189.
=Orosius=, 6, 8, 15, 21, 31, 105.
=Palladius=, Count, 94.
=Palladius=, bishop of Saintes, 190, 193-194, 201.
=Paris=, 47, 63, 75, 85, 87, 88, 99, 119, 152, 154, 158, 160, 163,
166, 189, 207, 208, 213, 245.
=Parthenius=, 70, 71.
=Pavia=, 231.
=Pelagius=, 200.
=Peter=, Gregory’s brother, 109-110.
=Poitiers=, 45, 46, 85, 97, 106, 108, 115, 127, 140, 158, 159, 165,
175, 181, 182, 208, 213, 220, 223, 236-243.
=Prætextatus=, bishop of Rouen, 119-124, 177, 197, 217.
=Priscus=, a Jew, 146-147, 155.
=Quintian=, 44.
=Radegunda=, 57, 158, 205, 237, 239, 240, 242.
=Ragnachar=, 36, 49.
=Ragnemod=, bishop of Paris, 114, 121, 158.
=Rauching=, 106-108, 208.
=Red Sea=, 9, 10.
=Remi=, 40, 41.
=Renatus= Frigeridus, 27, 30.
=Rheims=, 85, 87, 124.
=Richared=, king of Spain, 201, 205, 210, 216.
=Riculf=, 114, 136-140.
=Riculf= the sub-deacon, 136-140.
=Riguntha=, 163-165, 175, 177, 185, 221, 222.
=Roccelenus=, 108.
=Romans=, 35.
=Rouen=, 99, 106, 160.
=Sagittarius=, 96, 125-127, 128, 182-185.
=Saintes=, 88, 165.
=Sallust=, 83.
=Salunius=, 96, 125-127, 128.
=Salvius=, bishop of Alvi, 133, 140, 141, 169-172.
=Saturninus=, 12.
=Saxons=, 35, 79, 83-84, 96, 97, 118, 186.
=Sedulius=, 133, 166.
=Senlis=, 154, 166, 212, 213, 215.
=Severus=, Sulpicius, 21.
=Siagrius=, 35, 36, 49.
=Sichar=, 211-212.
=Sigibert= the lame, 47, 48.
=Sigibert=, King, 75, 87, 89, 90, 94, 97-100, 109, 118, 173, 191,
213, 215, 220, 256.
=Sigivald=, 66.
=Silvester=, kinsman of Gregory, 110.
=Soissons=, 37, 86, 87, 100, 106, 130, 154, 223.
=Stephen=, St., 25.
=Suevi=, 24, 118.
=Sulpicius= Alexander, 27.
=Sygismund=, 54-56, 120.
=Tangiers=, 25.
=Tauredunum=, 91.
=Tetradia=, 233-235.
=Tetricus=, bishop of Langres, 109-111, 192.
=Theodoald=, Theodovald, 71, 77, 78, 83.
=Theodobert=, King, 54, 57, 58, 60, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 250.
=Theodobert=, son of Chilperic, 116, 135.
=Theodomer=, 31.
=Theodore=, bishop of Marseilles, 153, 157, 192, 194, 218.
=Theodoric=, son of Clovis, 38, 47, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 66, 70,
254, 261.
=Theodoric= the Great, 54, 68.
=Theodosian= Law, 97.
=Thrasamund=, 24.
=Thuringia=, 31, 33, 38, 54, 56-57, 79.
=Tolbiac=, 58.
=Toulouse=, 44, 47, 177, 182.
=Tournai=, 99, 100, 139, 246.
=Tours=, x, 16, 22, 23, 33, 44, 45, 47, 50, 63, 75-79, 84, 85, 86,
88, 97, 106, 108, 115, 118, 121, 128, 134-140, 153, 159, 160,
175, 181, 186, 199, 205, 206, 208, 211, 213, 220, 231, 246,
268.
=Trèves=, 29, 31, 60, 70, 261.
=Trinity=, 53, 68, 132.
=Ursus=, 98.
=Vandals=, 24, 25, 30.
=Vannes=, 76.
=Vase= of Soissons, 37.
=Vaso= Galatæ, 14.
=Vectius= Epagatus, 13, 260.
=Verdun=, 67, 70, 186.
=Victor=, 7, 236, 244.
=Vienne=, 29, 42, 43, 56.
=Virgil=, 97, 249.
=Visigard=, 66, 67.
=Vouillé=, 46, 50.
=Vulfilaic=, xxii, 194-196.
=Waddo=, major-domo, 165, 183-185, 222, 223, 243.
=Wilichar=, 85.
=Zoroaster=, 8.
=Zülpich=, 47.
FOOTNOTES:
[100] Not exhaustive.
Records of Civilization
SOURCES AND STUDIES
EDITED BY JAMES T. SHOTWELL
(Numbers marked with an asterisk have already appeared; the others
are in preparation.)
THE HISTORY OF HISTORY; DOCUMENTS AND COMMENTARY. By JAMES
T. SHOTWELL, Ph.D., Professor of History in Columbia
University.
*HELLENIC CIVILIZATION. By G. W. BOTSFORD, Ph.D., Professor of
History in Columbia University, and E. G. SIHLER, Ph.D.,
Professor of the Latin Language and Literature in New York
University. 8vo, cloth, pp. xiii + 719. Price, $3.75 _net_.
THE RECORDS OF THE JEWS; OLD TESTAMENT LITERATURE. By JULIUS A.
BEWER, Ph.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis in Union
Theological Seminary.
1. Historical and Legal Books.
2. Prophetic Books.
3. Poetic and Didactic Books.
THE EARLY RECORDS OF CHRISTIANITY. By HAROLD H. TRYON, M.A.,
B.D., Instructor in New Testament and Church History in
Union Theological Seminary.
1. The Gospels.
2. The Primitive Church and the Pauline Mission.
3. The Developing Organization.
4. Christian Prophecy.
5. Early Apologies.
RELIGIONS OF THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD. By HAROLD H. TRYON, M.A.,
B.D.
1. The Mysteries.
2. The Cult of the Emperors.
PERSIAN AND HINDU DOCUMENTS. By A. V. W. JACKSON, Ph.D.,
Professor of Indo-Iranian Languages in Columbia University,
and E. W. HOPKINS, Ph.D., Professor of Sanskrit in Yale
University.
CHRONICLERS AND CHRONOLOGY. By JAMES T. SHOTWELL.
1. The Chronicle of Eusebius.
THE CHRISTIAN EPIC.
1. OROSIUS: History, against the Pagans. By CHARLES J. OGDEN, Ph.D.
MEDIEVAL HISTORIANS.
*1. GREGORY OF TOURS: History of the Franks. By ERNEST BREHAUT,
Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xxv + 284.
2. OTTO OF FREISING.
THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES.
1. The Sources of Irish History in the Middle Ages. By JAMES F.
KENNEY.
EARLY MEDIEVAL LAW.
1. Salic Law.
2. Penitentials.
3. The Anglo-Saxon Laws.
4. The Laws of Charlemagne. By MAUDE A. HUTTMANN, Ph.D.,
Instructor in History in Barnard College.
*THE “BOOK OF THE POPES” (_Liber Pontificalis_). By LOUISE R.
LOOMIS, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xxii + 169.
THE PETRINE THEORY AND THE MEDIEVAL PAPACY. By JAMES T.
SHOTWELL.
THE PAPACY IN MODERN SOCIETY. By CARLTON H. HAYES, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor of History in Columbia University.
THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM. By JAMES T. SHOTWELL.
1. The “Book of Sentences” of Peter Lombard, Part IV.
MEDIEVAL THOUGHT AND CULTURE. An Anthology from Gerbert,
Abelard, Roger Bacon, and the Scholastics. By LYNN
THORNDIKE, Ph.D., Associate Professor of History in Western
Reserve University.
HUMANISM AND CRITICAL SCHOLARSHIP.
1. Laurentius Valla on the Donation of Constantine. By CHRISTOPHER
B. COLEMAN, Ph.D., Professor of History in Butler College.
MODERN PHYSICAL SCIENCE; SOURCES AND COMMENTARY. By FREDERICK
BARRY, Ph.D., Instructor in Chemistry in Columbia
University.
THE RISE OF RATIONALISM IN ENGLAND.
SOCIAL HISTORY OF MODERN ENGLAND. By JAMES T. SHOTWELL.
1. Sources for the Industrial Revolution.
2. Guide to the Sources for the Social History of England,
1750-1850.
THE EXPANSION OF EUROPE. By WILLIAM R. SHEPHERD, Ph.D.,
Professor of History in Columbia University.
REPRISALS IN THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. By ELLERY C.
STOWELL, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of International Law in
Columbia University.
Transcriber’s Note:
Words, particularly proper nouns, may have multiple spelling
variations or inconsistent hyphenation in the text. These were left
unchanged, as were obsolete and alternative spellings. Two misspelled
words were corrected, noted below.
Words and phrases in italics are surrounded by underscores, _like
this_. Those in bold are surrounded by equal signs, =like this=.
Footnotes were renumbered sequentially and were moved to the end of
the chapter. Endnotes are treated as footnotes; alphabetical anchors
and links were added. Final stops missing at the end of sentences and
abbreviations were added.
Changes:
“Apollonaris” to “Apollinaris” … Sidonius Apollinaris …
“convert” to “convent” … from the convent at Poitiers,…