The centre of
gravity of the government lay in the municipalities whose rulers were
19
C.
gravity of the government lay in the municipalities whose rulers were
19
C.
Cambridge Medieval History - v1 - Christian Roman Empire and Teutonic Kingdoms
Attila had
in the meantime advanced as far as Orleans, which Sangiban, the king
of the Alans who were settled there, promised to betray to him. The
proposed treachery, however, was frustrated, for the allies were already
on the spot before the arrival of the Huns, and had encamped in strength
before the city. Attila thought he could not venture an attack on the
strong fortifications with his troops, which principally consisted of
cavalry, so he retreated to Troyes and took up a position five miles
before that town on an extensive plain near the place called Mauriacus,
there to await a decisive battle with the Gotho-Roman army which was
following him. Attila occupied the centre of the Hun array with the
picked troops of his people, while both the wings were composed of
troops from the subjected German tribes. His opponents were so
arranged that Theodoric with the bulk of the Visigoths occupied the
right wing, Aëtius with the Romans and a part of the Goths under
Thorismud formed the left wing of the army, while the untrustworthy
Alans stood in the centre. Attila first tried to get possession of a height
commanding the battlefield, but Aëtius and Thorismud were beforehand
and successfully repulsed all the attacks of the Huns on their position.
The king of the Huns now hurled himself with great force on the
Visigothic main body commanded by Theodoric. After a long struggle
the Goths succeeded in driving the Huns back to their camp; great
losses occurred on both sides; the aged king of the Goths was among the
slain, as was also a kinsman of Attila's.
The battle however remained drawn, for both sides kept the field. The
moral effect, which told for the Romans and their allies, was, however,
very important, inasmuch as the belief that the powerful king of the
Huns was invincible had suffered a severe shock. At first it was decided
to shut up the Huns in their barricade of wagons and starve them
out. But when the body of Theodoric, who had been supposed up till
then to be among the survivors, had been found and buried, Thorismud,
who was recognised as king by the army, called upon his people to
revenge and to take the enemy's position by storm. But Aëtius, who
did not wish to let the Goths become too powerful, succeeded in per-
suading Thorismud to relinquish his scheme, advising his return to
## p. 281 (#311) ############################################
451–456]
Theodoric II
281
Toulouse, to prevent any attempt on his brother's part to get possession
of the crown by means of the royal hoard there. Thus were the Goths
deprived of the well-earned fruits of their famous exploit; the Huns
returned home unmolested (451).
Thorismud proved himself anxious to develop the national policy
adopted by his father, and in the same spirit. After he had succeeded,
for the time being, in keeping possession of the throne, he subdued the
Alans who had settled near Orleans and thereby made preparations for
extending the Gothic territory beyond the Loire. Then he tried to
bring Arles under his power, but without having attained his object he
returned once more to his country, where in the meanwhile his brothers
Theodoric (II) and Friedrich had stirred up a rebellion. After several
armed encounters Thorismud was assassinated (453).
Theodoric II succeeded him on the throne. The characteristic mark
of his rule is the close though occasionally interrupted connexion with
Rome. The treaty broken under Theodoric I—which implied the
supremacy of the Empire over the kingdom of Toulouse—was renewed
immediately after his accession to the throne. For the rest, this con-
nexion was never taken seriously by Theodoric but was principally used by
him as a means towards the attainment of that end which his predecessors
had vainly striven for by direct means—the spread of the Visigoth
dominion in Gaul and more especially in Spain. Already, in the year
454, Theodoric found an opportunity for activity in the interest of the
Roman Empire; a Gothic army under Friedrich marched into Spain
and pacified the rebellious Bagaudae ex auctoritate Romana. After
the murder of Valentinian III (March 455) Avitus went as magister
militum to Gaul to win over the most influential powers of the country
for the new Emperor, Petronius Maximus. In consequence of his
personal influence-he had formerly initiated Theodoric into the know-
ledge of Roman literature-he succeeded in bringing the king of the
Goths to recognise Maximus. When, however, soon after this, the news
of the murder of the Emperor arrived (31 May), Theodoric requested
him to take the imperium himself. On 9 July, Avitus, who had
been proclaimed Emperor, accompanied by Gothic troops marched
into Italy where he met with universal recognition. The close relations
between the Empire and the Goths came again into operation against
the Sueves. As the latter repeatedly made plundering expeditions into
Roman territory, Theodoric, with a considerable force to which the
Burgundians also added a contingent, marched over the Pyrenees in the
summer of 456, decisively defeated them and took possession of a large
part of Spain, nominally for the Empire, but actually for himself.
But the state of affairs changed at one stroke when Avitus, in the
autumn of the year 456, abdicated the purple. Theodoric had now no
longer any interest in adhering to the Empire. He had in fact required
the promotion of Avitus because he enjoyed a great reputation in Gaul
CH. X.
## p. 282 (#312) ############################################
282
Theodoric II, Euric
[457–466
and possessed there a strong support among the resident nobility.
Friendship with him could only be of use to the king of the Goths in
respect to the Roman provincials living in Toulouse. But the elevation
of the new Emperor Majorian, on 1 April 457, had occurred in direct
opposition to the wishes of the Gallo-Roman nobility to place one
of themselves upon the imperial throne. Taking advantage of the
consequent discord in Gaul, Theodoric appeared as the open foe of the
imperial power of Rome. He himself marched with an army into the
Gallic province of Narbonne and once more began with the siege of
Arles ; he also sent troops to Spain which, however, only fought with
varying success. But in the winter of 458 the Emperor appeared in
Gaul with considerable forces, quieted the rebellious Burgundians and
obliged the Visigoths to raise the blockade of Arles and again conclude
peace (spring 459).
Although in the year 461 yet another change took place on the
imperial throne, Theodoric thought it more advantageous for the time
being to maintain, at least formally, the imperial alliance. On the other
hand the chief general Aegidius, a faithful follower of Majorian,
supported by a fine army, marched against the new imperial ruler. In
the conflict which then ensued Theodoric found a favourable opportunity
for resuming his policy of expansion in Gaul. At the call of Count
Agrippinus, who was commanding in Narbonne and was hard pressed by
Aegidius, he marched into the Roman territory and quartered upon that
important town Gothic troops under the command of his brother
Friedrich (462). Driven out of southern Gaul, Aegidius turned north-
wards whither a Gothic army led by Friedrich followed him. A great
battle took place near Orleans in which the Goths suffered a severe
defeat, chiefly through the bravery of the Salian Franks, who were
opposed to them and lost their leader in the battle (463). Taking
advantage of the victory, Aegidius now began to press victoriously into
the Visigoth territory, but sudden death prevented him from carrying out
his purposes (464).
Theodoric, freed from his most dangerous enemy, did not delay
making good the losses he had suffered; but he died in the year 466
at the hand of his brother Euric, who was a champion of the anti-
Roman national party and now ascended the throne. Contemporaries
agree in describing the new king as characterised by great energy and
warlike ability. We may venture to add from historical facts that he
was also a man of distinguished political talent. The leading idea in
his policy—the entire rejection of even a formal suzerainty of the
Roman Empire-came into operation on his accession to the throne.
The embassy which he then sent off to the Emperor of Eastern
Rome can only have had for its object a request for the recognition of
the Visigoth sovereignty. As no agreement was arrived at he tried to
bring about an alliance with the Vandals and the Sueves, but the
VE
## p. 283 (#313) ############################################
467–475]
Euric
283
negotiations came to nothing when a strong East-Roman fleet appeared
in African waters (467). Euric at first pursued a neutral course, but as
the Roman expedition, set on foot with such considerable effort against
the Vandal kingdom, resulted so lamentably (468), he did not hesitate
to come forward as assailant, while he simultaneously pushed forward his
troops into Gaul and Spain (469). He opened hostilities in Gaul with
a sudden attack on the Bretons whom the Emperor had sent to
the town of Bourges ; at Déols, not far from Chateauroux, a battle
took place in which the Bretons were overthrown. Yet the Goths did
not succeed in pushing forward over the Loire to the north. Count
Paulus, supported by Frankish auxiliaries, successfully opposed them
here. Euric therefore concentrated his whole strength partly on the
conquest of the province of Aquitanica Prima, partly on the annexation
of the lower Rhone valley, especially the long-coveted Arles. The
provinces of Novempopulana and (for the most part) Narbonensis Prima
had been probably already occupied by the Goths under Theodoric II.
An army which the West-Roman Emperor Anthemius sent to Gaul
for the relief of Arles was defeated in the year 470 or 471, and for
the time being a large part of Provence was seized by the Goths. In
Aquitanica Prima, also, town after town fell into the hands of Euric's
general Victorius; only Clermont, the capital city of Auvergne, obstinately
defied the repeated attacks of the barbarians for many years. The
moving spirits in the resistance were the brave Ecdicius, a son of the
former Emperor Avitus, and the poet Sidonius Apollinaris, who had
been its bishop from about 470. The letters of the latter give us a
clear picture of the struggle which was waged with the greatest animosity
on both sides. Euric is said to have stated that he would rather give
up the much more valuable Septimania than renounce the possession of
that town. The wholly impotent Western Empire was unable to do
anything for the besieged. In the year 475 peace was at last made
between the Emperor Nepos and Euric by the intervention of Bishop
Epiphanius of Ticinum (Pavia). Unfortunately the conditions are not
more accurately known, but there can be no doubt that, besides the
previously conquered territory in Spain, the district between the Loire,
the Rhone, the Pyrenees and the two seas was relinquished to Euric in
sovereign possession. Thus Auvergne, so fiercely contended for, was
surrendered to the Goths.
But in spite of this important success the king of the Goths had by
no means reached the goal of his desires ; it may be seen from the line
of policy he followed later that the present moment seemed to him fit
for carrying out that subjection of the whole of the West which had
long since been the aim of Alaric I.
For this reason peace only lasted for a year, which was spent in
settling internal affairs. The most important event under Euric's
government at this time is the publication of a Code of Law which was
CH. X.
## p. 284 (#314) ############################################
284
Euric
[476–484
intended to settle the legal relations of the Goths, both amongst them-
selves and with the Romans who had come under the Gothic dominion.
The deposition of the last West-Roman Emperor, Romulus, by the
leader of the mercenaries, Odovacar (Sept. 476), gave the king a welcome
reason for renewing hostilities, as he looked upon the treaty made with
the Empire as dissolved. A Gothic army crossed the Rhone and
obtained final possession of the whole of southern Provence as far as the
Maritime Alps, together with the cities of Arles and Marseilles, after
a victorious battle against the Burgundians, who had ruled over this
district under Roman suzerainty. But when Euric also marched a
body of troops into Italy it suffered defeat from the officers of Odovacar.
Consequently a treaty was concluded by the East-Roman Emperor
Zeno and the king of the Burgundians whereby the newly conquered
territory in Gaul (between the Rhone and the Alps south of the
Durance) was surrendered by Odovacar to the Goths, while Euric
evidently pledged himself to undertake no further hostilities against
Italy (c. 477).
Euric was incessantly harassed by the difficulties of defending this
mighty conquest from foes without and within. In particular, very
frequent cause for interference was given by the conduct of the Catholic
clergy, who openly shewed their disloyalty, and in the Vandal kingdom
did not shrink from the most treacherous actions. Yet they seem only
in rare instances to have been answered by violence and cruelty. The
Saxon pirates who, according to old custom, infested the coast of Gaul
were vigorously punished by a fleet sent out against them. In the
same way it seems that an invasion of the Salian Franks was warded
off successfully. It is not strange that, owing to the prestige of the
Visigoth power, Euric's help was repeatedly requested by other peoples,
as by the Heruli, Warni and Tulingi who, settled in the Netherlands,
found themselves threatened by the overwhelming might of the Franks
and owed to the intervention of the Gothic king the maintenance of
their political existence. The poet Sidonius Apollinaris has left behind
a vivid description of the way in which, at that time, the representatives
of the most diverse nations pressed round Euric at the Visigoth Court,
even the Persians are said to have formed an alliance with him against the
Eastern Empire. It seems that envoys from the Roman population of
Italy also appeared at Toulouse to ask the king to expel Odovacar, whose
rule was only reluctantly endured by the Italians.
We do not know if Euric intended gratifying this last request, in
any case he was prevented from executing any such designs through
death, which overtook him in Arles in December 484. Under his son
Alaric II the Visigoth power fell from its height. To be sure, the
,
beginning of the decline originated at a time further back. Ataulf's
political programme, as already observed, had originally contemplated
the establishment of a national Gothic State in the place of the Roman
## p. 285 (#315) ############################################
484–502]
Alaric II
285
Empire. Yet not one of the Visigoth rulers, in spite of honest purpose,
could accomplish this task. It is to their credit that they succeeded at
last, after severe fighting, in freeing themselves from the suzerainty of
the Emperor and obtaining political autonomy, but the State which
thus resulted resembled a Germanic National State no more than it did a
Roman Imperium, and it could not contain the seeds of life because it was
in a great measure dependent on foreign obsolescent institutions. The
Goths had entered the world of Roman civilisation too suddenly to be
able either to resist or to absorb the foreign influences which pressed on
them from all sides. It was fortunate for the
progress
of Romanisation
that the Goths, cut off from the rest of the German world, could not
draw thence fresh strength to recuperate their nationality or to replace
their losses, and moreover that through the immense extension of the
kingdom under Euric the numerical proportion between the Roman and
Gothic population had altered very much in favour of the former. So
under the circumstances it was a certainty that the Gothic kingdom in
Gaul must succumb to the rising and politically creative power of the
Franks. Neither the personality of Alaric, who was little fitted for
ruling, nor the antagonism between Catholicism and Arianism caused
the downfall, they only hastened it.
Alaric ascended the throne on 28 December 484. The king was
of an indolent weak nature, altogether the opposite of his father, and
without energy or warlike capacity, as immediately became evident.
For example, he submitted to give up Syagrius, whom he had received
into his kingdom after the battle of Soissons (486), when the victorious
king of the Franks threatened him with war. The inevitable settlement
by arms of the rivalry between the two principal powers in Gaul was
of course only put off a little longer by this compliance. About 494
the war began. It lasted for many years and was carried on with varying
success on both sides. Hostilities were ended through the mediation
of the Ostrogoth king Theodoric-who in the meanwhile had become
Alaric's father-in-law-by the conclusion of a treaty of peace on the
terms of Uti possidetis (c. 502), but this condition could not last
long, for the antagonism was considerably aggravated by the conversion
of Clovis to the Catholic Church in the year 496 (25 Dec. ). Conse-
quently the greatest part of Alaric's Roman subjects, with the clergy of
course at their head, adhered to the Franks, and jealously endeavoured
to bring about the subjection of the Visigoth kingdom to their rule.
Alaric was obliged to adopt severe measures in some instances against
such treasonable desires, but usually he tried by gentleness and the
granting of favours to win over the Romans to his support, an attempt
which, in view of the prevalent and insurmountable antagonism, was of
course quite ineffectual and even defeated its own ends, being regarded
only as weakness. Thus he permitted the bishoprics kept vacant under
Euric to be again filled, he moreover permitted the Gallic bishops to
CH. X.
## p. 286 (#316) ############################################
286
Battle of Vouglé
[506–507
hold a Council at Agde in September 506, and—indication of the
ambiguous attitude of the clergy—it was opened with a prayer for
the prosperity of the Visigoth kingdom. The publication of the so-
called Lex Romana Visigothorum, also named Breviarium Alaricianum,
represented the most important act of conciliation. This Code of Law,
which had been composed by a commission of lawyers together with
prominent laymen and even clergy, and was drawn from extracts and
explanations of Roman law, was sanctioned by the king at Toulouse,
2 Feb. 506, after having received the approval of an assembly of
bishops and distinguished provincials, and was ordered to be used by
the Roman population in the Gothic kingdom.
Why the explosion was delayed until the year 507 is unknown. That
the king of the Franks was the aggressor is certain. He easily found a
pretext for beginning the war as champion and protector of Catholic Chris-
tianity against the absolutely just measures which Alaric took against his
treacherous orthodox clergy. Clovis had sufficiently appreciated the by
no means despicable power of the Visigoth kingdom, and had summoned
a very considerable army, one contingent of which was furnished by the
Ripuarian Franks. His allies, the Burgundians, approached from the
east in order to take the Goths in the flank. Among his allies Clovis
probably also counted on the Byzantines, who placed their fleet at his
disposal. On his part Alaric had not looked upon coming events
idly, but his preparations were hampered by the bad state of the finances
of his kingdom. In order to obtain the necessary funds he was obliged
to coin gold pieces of inferior value, which were soon discredited everywhere.
Apparently the fighting strength of the Gothic army was inferior to the
army of Clovis, but if the Ostrogoth troops, who had held out prospects
of coming, should arrive at the right time Alaric could hope to oppose
his foe successfully. The king of the Franks had to endeavour to bring
about a decisive action before the arrival of these allies. In the spring
of 507 he suddenly crossed the Loire and marched towards Poitiers,
where he probably joined the Burgundians. On the Campus Vocladensis,
ten miles from Poitiers, the Visigoths had taken up their position.
Alaric put off beginning battle because he was waiting for the Ostrogoth
troops, but as they were hindered by the appearance of a Byzantine fleet
in Italian waters he determined to fight instead of beating a retreat,
as it would have been wise to do. After a short engagement the Goths
turned and fed. In the pursuit the king of the Goths was killed, it was
said by Clovis' own hand (507). With this overthrow the rule of the
Visigoths in Gaul was ended for ever.
The principal town of the Gothic kingdom was Toulouse, where the
royal treasure was also kept; Euric from time to time also held court in
Bordeaux, Alaric II in Narbonne. The Gothic rule originally stretched,
as has been already mentioned, as far as the province of Aquitanica
## p. 287 (#317) ############################################
Goths and Romans
287
Secunda and some bordering municipalities, among which was the
district of Toulouse, but later on it extended not only over the whole
territory of the Gallic provinces, but in addition to several parts of the
provinces Viennensis, Narbonensis Secunda, Alpes Maritimae, and
Lugdunensis Tertia. The Gothic possessions included also the greater
part of the Iberian peninsula, i. e. the provinces of Baetica, Lusitania,
Tarraconensis and Carthaginensis. The provinces named were in Roman
times, in so far as it was a question of civil administration, governed by
consulares or praesides, and they were again divided into city-districts
(civitates or municipia). Under the sovereignty of the Goths this
constitution was maintained in its chief features.
The inhabitants of the kingdom of Toulouse were composed of two
races—the Goths and the Romans. The Goths were regarded by the
Romans as foreigners so long as the federal connexion remained in force,
yet both peoples lived side by side, each under its own law and jurisdic-
tion: intermarriage was forbidden. This rigid line of separation was
adhered to even when the Goths had shaken off the imperial suzerainty
and the Gothic king had become the sovereign of the native population
of Gaul. Theoretically, the Romans had equal privileges in the State;
thus they were not treated as a conquered people without rights, as
the Vandals and Langobards (Lombards) dealt with the inhabitants of
Africa and Italy. That the Goths were the real rulers was clearly enough
made manifest to the Romans.
The domestic condition of the Visigoths before the settlement in
Gaul was undoubtedly on the same level as in their original home;
private property in land was unknown, agriculture was comparatively
primitive, and cattle-rearing provided the principal means of subsistence.
A national change began with the settlement in Aquitaine. This was
done on the principle of the Roman quartering of troops, so that the
Roman landowners were obliged to give up to the Goths in free possession
a portion of their total property together with the coloni, slaves and
cattle appertaining to it. . According to the oldest Gothic codes of law
the Goth received two-thirds of the tilled land and, it seems, one-half
of the woods. The wood and the meadow land which was not partitioned
belonged to the Goths and the Romans for use in common. The parcels
of land subjected to partition were called sortes, the Roman share,
generally, tertia, their occupants hospites or consortes. The Gothic
sortes were exempt from taxation. As the invaders were very numerous
compared with the extent of the province to be apportioned, there
is no doubt that not only the large estates, but also the middle-
sized and smaller properties were partitioned. Nevertheless it is evident
that not every Goth can have shared with a Roman possessor, because
there would certainly not have been estates enough; we must rather
assume that in the share given up larger properties were split up among
several families, as a rule among kinsmen. As the apportionment of the
CH. X.
## p. 288 (#318) ############################################
288
Social Conditions
single lots undoubtedly took place through the decisive influence of the
king, it is natural that the nobility (i. e. nobility by military service) was
favoured in the partition above the ordinary freemen. The landed
property of the monarch's favourites must have gained considerably in
extent, as elsewhere, through assignments from state property. The
very considerable imperial possessions, both crown and private property,
as a rule fell to the share of royalty.
Land partition in the districts conquered later followed the same
plan as in Aquitaine ; seizures of entire Roman estates certainly occurred,
but they were exceptions and happened under special circumstances. As
a rule the Romans were protected by law in the possession of their
tertiae, even if it were only for fiscal reasons. The considerably
extended range of the Gothic kingdom offered the people ample space
for colonisation, so it was not necessary to encroach on the whole of the
Roman territory as had been the case in Aquitaine. It is to be assumed
that in the newly won territories only the superfluous element of the
population had to be provided for; we are not to suppose a general
desertion of the home-land.
The social economy proceeded, on the whole, on the same lines as
before, i. e. through coloni and slaves, from whose toil the owners derived
their principal support, at least in so far as it was a question of food.
For the Goths, whose favourite occupations were warfare and the chase,
had no inclination to devote themselves to arduous agricultural toil.
They only wanted to control directly the rearing of cattle, as they did
of old ; animal food seems to have been provided principally by means
of large herds of swine. The revolution which the partition of land
brought about in the habits of the Goths was too powerful not to exert
the deepest influence on all the conditions of life. The rich revenues
led to the display of a wanton and indolent way of living; the close
contact with the Romans, who were for the most part morally decadent,
was bound to affect injuriously a people so famous in earlier times for its
austere manners. The old national bonds of union, besides having been
relaxed through the migration, now from the scattering of the mass in
colonisation lost more and more of their original importance, since kins-
men need no longer be companions on the farmstead in order to obtain
a living. The adoption of the Roman conditions of land-holding
obliged the Goths to accept numerous legal arrangements which were
foreign to their national law and altered its principles considerably.
Nevertheless the national consciousness was strong enough to prevent
it from merging itself quickly and completely in the Roman system ; in
contrast to the Ostrogoths who did nothing but carefully conserve the
Roman institutions which they found, the Visigoths are remarkable
for an attitude in many respects independent towards the foreign
organisation.
The entire power of government lay in the hands of the king, but
## p. 289 (#319) ############################################
Political Conditions
289
the several rulers did not succeed in making their power absolute.
Outwardly the Visigoth king was only slightly distinguished from the
other freemen ; like them he wore the national skin garment, and long
curly hair. The raised seat as well as the sword appear as tokens of
royal power, the insignia such as the purple mantle and the crown do
not come till later. The succession to the throne follows the system
peculiar to the old German constitution of combined election and
inheritance. After the death of Alaric I his brother-in-law Ataulf was
chosen king ; thus a kindred connexion played an important part in
this choice. Ataulf's friendliness to Rome had placed him in opposition
to the great mass of the people; therefore his successor was not his
brother, as he had wished, but first Sigerich and then Wallia, who both
belonged to other houses. The elevation of Theodoric I is also an
instance of free election; the royal dignity remained in his house for
over a century. Thorismud was appointed king by the army; the
succession of Theodoric II, Euric and Alaric II, on the other hand, was
only confirmed by popular recognition.
Just as the people regularly took a part in the choice of the successor
to the throne, so their influence was often brought to bear on the
sovereign's conduct of government. After the settlement in Gaul there
could certainly no longer be any question of a national assembly in the
old sense of the word, especially after the great expansion of territory
under Euric. Meetings of all the freemen had become impossible on
account of the expansion of the Gothic colonies. The circle of those
who could obey the call to assemble became, therefore, smaller and
smaller, while in carrying out the principal public functions, such as
the coronation of the king, only those of the people who happened
to be present at the place of election or who lived in the immediate
neighbourhood, could as a rule take part. The importance which the
commonalty hereby lost was gained by the nobility, an aristocracy
founded on personal service to the king. It was only in the army that
the greater part of the people found opportunity of expressing its will.
It is certain that among the Visigoths, as among the Franks, regular
military assemblies were held, which at first served the purpose of reviews
and were under the command of the king. In these assemblies important
political questions were discussed; but the decision of the people was
not always for the welfare of the State.
The kingdom was subdivided very nearly on the lines of the previous
Roman divisions into provinciae, and these again into civitates (territoria).
At the head of the province was the dux as magistrate for Goths and
Romans. He was also, as his title implies, in the first place the
commander of the militia in his district, and he provided also the final
authority and appeal in matters of government, corresponding to the
Praefectus Praetorio or vicarius of imperial times.
The centre of
gravity of the government lay in the municipalities whose rulers were
19
C. MED. H. VOL. I. CH. İ.
## p. 290 (#320) ############################################
290
The Church
comites civitatum. They took exactly the place of the Roman pro-
vincial governors, so that the city-districts also appear under the title of
provinciae. Their authority extended even to the exercise of jurisdiction
with the exception of such cases as were reserved to the civic magistrates,
and included control of the police and the collection of taxes. The
dux could at the same time be comes of a civitas in his district. At
the head of the towns themselves were the curiales who, as hitherto, were
bound by oath to fill their offices; and they were personally responsible
for collecting the taxes. The most important official was the defensor,
who was chosen from among the curiales by the citizens and only con-
firmed by the king. He exercised, in the first instance, jurisdiction in
minor matters, but his activity extended over all the branches of
municipal administration. Side by side with this Roman magistrature
existed the national system which the Goths had brought with them.
The Gothic people formed themselves into bodies of thousands, five
hundreds, hundreds and tens, which also remained as personal societies
after the settlement. The millenarius, as of old, led the thousand in
war and ruled over it jointly with the heads of the hundreds both in
war and in peace. The comes civitatis and his vicar originally only
possessed jurisdiction over the Romans of his own circuit, but in Euric's
time that had so far changed that he now possessed authority to judge
the Goths as well in civil suits in conjunction with the millenarius : thus
the later condition was prepared in which the millenarius appears only
as military official. On the other hand the defensor remained a judiciary
solely for the Romans.
We know but little about the officers of the central government.
The first minister of Euric and of Alaric II was Leo of Narbonne, a
distinguished man of varied talents. His duty comprised a combination
of the functions of the quaestor sacri palatii and of the magister
officiorum at the imperial Court; he drew up the king's orders, con-
ducted business with the ambassadors and arranged the applications for
an audience. A higher minister of the royal chancery was Anianus,
who attested the authenticity of the official copies of the Lex Romana
Visigothorum and distributed them ; he seems to have answered to the
Roman primicerius notariorum or referendarius.
The organisation of the Catholic Church was not disturbed by the
Visigoth rule: rather it was strengthened. The ecclesiastical subdivision
of the land as it had developed in the last years of the Roman sway
corresponded on the whole with the political : the bishoprics, which
coincided in extent with the town districts, were grouped under metro-
politan sees, which corresponded with the provinces of the secular
administration. Since the middle of the fifth century the authority of
the Roman bishop over the Church had been generally recognised. Next
to the Pope the bishop of Arles exercised over the Gallic clergy a theo-
retically almost unlimited disciplinary power. A bishop was chosen by
,
## p. 291 (#321) ############################################
Arianism
291
the laity and the clergy of his see, and was ordained by the metropolitan
bishop of the province together with other bishops. Although the
boundaries of the Visigoth kingdom now in no way coincided with the
old provincial and metropolitan boundaries, the hitherto existing metro-
politan connexion was nevertheless not set aside, nor were the relations
of the bishops with the Pope interfered with. The Gothic government
as a rule shewed great indulgence and consideration to the Catholic
Church, which only changed to a more severe treatment when the clergy
were guilty of treasonable practices, as happened under Euric. No
organised and general persecution of the Catholics from religious
fanaticism ever took place. The Catholic Church enjoyed particularly
favourable conditions under Alaric II, who in consideration of the
threatening struggle with Clovis acknowledged the formal legal position
of the Roman Church according to the hitherto existing rules.
Hardly anything is known of the ecclesiastical organisation of the
Arians in the kingdom of Toulouse. Probably in all the larger towns
there were Arian bishops as well as orthodox ones, and no doubt in
earlier times they had been appointed by the king. Under the several
bishops were the different classes of subordinate clergy; presbyters and
deacons are mentioned as in the orthodox Church. The endowment
of the Arian Church was probably as a rule allowed for out of the
revenue; now and then confiscated Catholic churches as well as their
endowments were also made over to it. The church service was of
course held in the vernacular as it was in other German churches ; the
greater number of the clergy were therefore of Gothic nationality. The
opposition between the two creeds was also certainly a very sharp one.
Both sides carried on an active propaganda, which on the Arian side
not unfrequently seems to have been urged by force, but such ebullitions
scarcely had the support and approval of the Gothic government.
Very scanty indeed is our knowledge of the civilisation of the
kingdom of Toulouse. That the Romance element was foremost in
almost
every department has already been observed. The Goths how-
ever held to their national dress until a later period ; they wore the
characteristic skin garment which covered the upper part of the body,
and laced boots of horse-hide which reached up to the calf of the
leg; the knee was left bare. There is no doubt that the Gothic
tongue was spoken by the people in intercourse with each other;
unhappily no vestiges remain of it except in proper names. It is certain
however that a great part of the nobility, especially the higher officials,
understood Latin well. Most of the Arian clergy undoubtedly were
also masters of both languages. Latin was the language of diplomatic
intercourse and of legislation. Theodoric II was trained in Roman
literature by Avitus; Euric however understood so little of the foreign
language that he was obliged to use an interpreter for diplomatic
correspondence. Yet this king was in no way opposed to the knowledge
CH. X.
19-2
## p. 292 (#322) ############################################
292
Civilisation
and significance of classical culture. The Visigothic Court therefore
formed a haven of frequent resort for the last representatives of Roman
literature in Gaul. And the kings, from various motives, but especially
from a fondness for Roman models, would employ the art of these men
to celebrate their own deeds. Here may be named in the first place
the poet Sidonius Apollinaris who for a long time lived, first in the
Court of Theodoric II and then in that of Euric. Euric's minister Leo
also is said to have distinguished himself as a poet, historian and lawyer,
but no more of his writings have been preserved than of the rhetorician
Lampridius, who sang the fame of the Gothic royal house at the Court
of Bordeaux. But the decay of literature and of culture in general,
which had been for so long in progress in spite of the support of the
still existent schools of rhetoricians, could assuredly not be stayed by
the patronage of the Gothic kings.
(B)
THE FRANKS BEFORE CLOVIS.
Tacitus, in the de Moribus Germanorum, tells us that the Germans
claimed to be descended from a common ancestor, Mannus, son of the
earth-born god Tuisco. Mannus, according to the legend, had three
sons, from whom sprang three groups of tribes : the Istaevones, who
:
dwelt along the banks of the Rhine; the Ingaevones, whose seat was on
the shores of the two seas, the Oceanus Germanicus (North Sea) and the
Mare Suevicum (the Baltic), and in the Cimbric peninsula between; and,
lastly, more to the east and south, on the banks of the Elbe and the
Danube, the Herminones. After indicating this general division,
Tacitus, in the latter part of his work, enumerates about forty tribes,
whose customs presented, no doubt, a strong general resemblance, but
whose institutions and organisation shewed differences of a sufficiently
marked character.
When we pass from the first century to the fifth, we find that the
names of the Germanic peoples given by Tacitus have completely
disappeared. Not only is there no mention of Istaevones, Ingaevones
and Herminones, but there is no trace of individual tribes such as the
Chatti, Chauci and Cherusci; their names are wholly unknown to the
writers of the fourth and fifth centuries. In their place we find these
writers using other designations: they speak of Franks, Saxons, Alemans.
The writers of the Merovingian period not unnaturally supposed
that these were the names of new peoples, who had invaded Germany
and made good their footing there in the interval. This hypothesis
## p. 293 (#323) ############################################
Legends of the Franks
293
found favour especially with regard to the Franks. As early as Gregory
of Tours, we find mention of a tradition according to which the Franks
had come from Pannonia, had first established themselves on the right
bank of the Rhine, and had subsequently crossed the river. In the
chronicler known under the name of Fredegar the Franks are represented
as descended from the Trojans. “Their first king was Priam ; after-
wards they had a king named Friga ; later, they divided into two parts,
one of which migrated into Macedonia and received the name of
Macedonians. Those who remained were driven out of Phrygia and
wandered about, with their wives and children, for many years. They
chose for themselves a king named Francion, and from him took the
name of Franks. Francion made war upon many peoples, and after
devastating Asia finally passed over into Europe, and established himself
between the Rhine, the Danube and the sea. The writer of the Liber
Historiae combines the statements of Gregory of Tours and of the
pseudo-Fredegar, and, with a fine disregard of chronology, relates that,
after the fall of Troy, one part of the Trojan people, under Priam and
Antenor, came by way of the Black Sea to the mouth of the Danube,
sailed up the river to Pannonia, and founded a city called Sicambria.
The Trojans, so this anonymous writer continues, were defeated by the
Emperor Valentinian, who laid them under tribute and named them
Franks, that is wild men (feros), because of their boldness and hardness
of heart. After a time the Franks slew the Roman officials whose duty
it was to demand the tribute from them, and, on the death of Priam,
they quitted Sicambria, and came to the neighbourhood of the Rhine.
There they chose themselves a king named Pharamond, son of Marcomir.
This naïf legend, half-popular, half-learned, was accepted as fact
throughout the Middle Ages. From it alone comes the name of
Pharamond, which in most histories heads the list of the kings of
France. In reality, there is nothing to prove that the Franks, any
more than the Saxons or the Alemans, were races who came in from
without, driven into Germany by an invasion of their own territory.
Some modern scholars have thought that the origin of the Franks,
and of the other races who make their appearance between the third
century and the fifth, might be traced to a curious custom of the
Germanic tribes. The nobles, whom Tacitus calls principes, attached
to themselves a certain number of comrades, comites, whom they bound
to fealty by a solemn oath. At the head of these followers they made
pillaging expeditions, and levied war upon the neighbouring peoples,
without however involving the community to which they belonged.
The comes was ready to die for his chief; to desert him would have been
an infamy. The chief, on his part, protected his follower, and gave
him a war-horse, spear, etc. as the reward of his loyalty. Thus there
were formed, outside the regular State, bands of warriors united together
by the closest ties. These bands, so it is said, soon formed, in the
CA. X.
## p. 294 (#324) ############################################
294
Origin of the Franks
interior of Germany, what were virtually new States, and the former
princeps simply took the title of king. Such, according to the theory,
was the origin of the Franks, the Alemans and the Saxons. But this
theory, however ingenious, cannot be accepted. The bands were formed
exclusively of young men of an age to bear arms; among the Franks
we find from the first old men, women and children. The bands were
organised solely for war; whereas the most ancient laws of the Franks
have much to say about the ownership of land, and about crimes against
property; they represent the Franks as an organised nation with regular
institutions.
The Franks, then, did not come into Germany from without; and
it would be rash to seek their origin in the custom of forming bands.
That being so, only one hypothesis remains open. From the second
century to the fourth the Germans lived in a continual state of unrest.
The different communities ceaselessly made war on one another and
destroyed one another. Civil war also devastated many of them. The
ancient communities were thus broken up, and from their remains were
formed new communities which received new names. Thus is to be
explained why it is that the nomenclature of the Germanic peoples in
the fifth century differs so markedly from that which Tacitus has recorded.
But neighbouring tribes presented, despite their constant antagonisms,
considerable resemblances. They had a common dialect and similar
habits and customs. They sometimes made temporary alliances, though
holding themselves free to quarrel again before long and make war on
one another with the utmost ferocity. In time, groups of these tribes
came to be called by generic names, and this is doubtless the character
of the names Franks, Alemans and Saxons. These names
were not
applied, in the fourth and fifth centuries, to a single tribe, but to a group
of neighbouring tribes who presented, along with real differences, certain
common characteristics.
It appears that the peoples who lived along the right bank of the
Rhine, to the north of the Main, received the name of Franks; those
who had established themselves between the Ems and the Elbe, that of
Saxons (Ptolemy mentions the Edgoves as inhabitants of the Cimbric
peninsula, and perhaps the name of this petty tribe had passed to the
whole group); while those whose territory lay to the south of the Main
and who at some time or other had overflowed into the agri decumates
(the present Baden) were called Alemans. It is possible that, after all,
we should see in these three peoples, as Waitz has suggested, the
Istaevones, Ingaevones and Herminones of Tacitus.
But it must be understood that between the numerous tribes known
under each of the general names of Franks, Saxons and Alemans there
was no common bond. They did not constitute a single State but
groups of States without federal connexion or common organisation.
Sometimes two, three, even a considerable number of tribes, might join
## p. 295 (#325) ############################################
240–392)
Franks and Romans
295
together to prosecute a war in common, but when the war was over the
link snapped and the tribes fell asunder again.
Documentary evidence enables us to trace how the generic name
Franci came to be given to certain tribes between the Main and the
North Sea, for we find these tribes designated now by the ancient
name which was known to Tacitus and again by the later name. In
Peutinger's chart we find Chamavi qui et Pranci and there is no
doubt that we should read qui et Franci. The Chamavi inhabited the
country between the Yssel and the Ems; later on, we find them a little
further south, on the banks of the Rhine in Hamaland, and their laws
were collected in the ninth century in the document known as the Lex
Francorum Chamavorum. Along with the Chamavi we may reckon among
the Franks the Attuarii or Chattuarii. We read in Ammianus Marcellinus
(xx. 10) Rheno transmisso, regionem pervasit (Julian in A. D. 360)
Francorum quos Atthuarios vocant. Later, the pagus Attuariorum will
correspond to the country of Emmerich, of Cleves and of Xanten. We
may note that in the Middle Ages there was to be found in Burgundy, in
the neighbourhood of Dijon, a pagus Attuariorum, and it is very probable
that a portion of this tribe settled at this spot in the course of the fifth
century. The Bructeri, the Ampsivarii and the Chatti were, like the
Chamavi, reckoned as Franks. They are mentioned as such in a well-known
passage of Sulpicius Alexander which is cited by Gregory of Tours
(Historia Francorum, 11. 9). Arbogast, a barbarian general in the service
of Rome, desires to take vengeance on the Franks and their chiefs-
subreguli-Sunno and Marcomir. Consequently in midwinter of the
year 392 collecto exercitu transgressus Rhenum, Bructeros ripae proximos,
pagum etiam quem Chamavi incolunt depopulatus est, nullo unquam
occursante, nisi quod pauci ex Ampsivariis et Catthis Marcomere duce in
ulterioribus collium jugis apparuere.
It is this Marcomir, chief of the
Ampsivarii and Chatti, whom the author of the Liber Historiae makes the
father of Pharamond, though he has nothing whatever to do with the
Salian Franks.
Thus it is evident that the name Franks was given to a group of
tribes, not to a single tribe. The earliest historical mention of the
name may be that in Peutinger's chart', supposing, at least, that the words
et Pranci are not a later interpolation. The earliest mention in a
literary source is in the Vita Aureliani of Vopiscus, cap. 7. In the year
240, Aurelian, who was then only a military tribune, immediately after
defeating the Franks in the neighbourhood of Mainz, was marching
against the Persians, and his soldiers as they marched chanted this
refrain :
Mille Sarmatas, mille Francos semel et semel occidimus;
Mille Persas quaerimus.
It would be in any case impossible to follow the history of all these
1 The date of the chart is very uncertain.
CH, X
## p. 296 (#326) ############################################
296
The Salian Franks
( 358—400
sea,
Frankish tribes for want of evidence, but even if their history was known
it would be of quite secondary interest, for it would have only a remote
connexion with the history of France. Offshoots from these various
tribes no doubt established themselves sporadically here and there in
ancient Gaul, as in the case of the Attuarii. It was not however by
the Franks as a whole, but by a single tribe, the Salian Franks, that
Gaul was to be conquered ; it was their king who was destined to be the
ruler of this noble territory. It is therefore to the Salian Franks that
we must devote our attention.
The Salian Franks are mentioned for the first time in A. D. 358. In
that year Julian, as yet only a Caesar, marched against them. Petit
primos omnium Francos, eos videlicet quos consuetudo Salios appellavit
(Ammianus Marcellinus, xvII. 8). What is the origin of the name?
It was long customary to derive it from the river Yssel (Isala), or
from Saalland to the south of the Zuiderzee; but it seems much more
probable that the name comes from sal (the salt sea). The Salian
Franks at first lived by the shores of the North Sea, and were known
by this name in contradistinction to the Ripuarian Franks, who lived
on the banks of the Rhine. All their oldest legends speak of the
and the name of one of their earliest kings, Merovech, signifies sea-born.
From the shores of the North Sea the Salian Franks had advanced
little by little towards the south, and at the period when Ammianus
Marcellinus mentions them they occupied Toxandria, that is to say the
region to the south of the Meuse, between that river and the Scheldt.
Julian completely defeated the Salian Franks, but he left them in
possession of their territory of Toxandria. Only, instead of occupying
it as conquerors, they held it as foederati, agreeing to defend it against
all other invaders. They furnished also to the armies of Rome soldiers
whom we hear of as serving in far distant regions. In the Notitia
Dignitatum, in which we find a sort of Army List of the Empire drawn
up about the beginning of the fifth century, there is mention of
Salii seniores and Salii juniores, and we also find Salii figuring in the
auxilia palatina.
At the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century the
Salian Franks established in Toxandria ceased to recognise the authority
of Rome, and began to assert their independence. It was at this period
that the Roman civilisation disappeared from these regions. The Latin
language ceased to be spoken and the Germanic tongue was alone
employed. Even at the present day the inhabitants of these districts
speak Flemish, a Germanic dialect. The place-names were altered and
took on a Germanic form, with the terminations hem, ghem, seele and
zele, indicating a dwelling-place, loo wood, dal valley. The Christian
religion retreated along with the Roman civilisation, and those regions
reverted to paganism. For a long time, it would seem, these Salian
Franks were held in check by the great Roman road which led, by way
## p. 297 (#327) ############################################
431–451]
Clodion, Merovech
297
of Arras, Cambrai and Bavay, to Cologne, and which was protected by
numerous forts.
The Salians were subdivided into a number of tribes each holding a
pagus. Each of these divisions had a king who was chosen from
the most noble family, and who was distinguished from his fellow-
Franks by his long hair-criniti reges. The first of these kings to whom
we have a distinct reference bore the name of Clogio or Clojo (Clodion).
He had his seat at Dispargum, the exact position of which has not
been determined—it may have been Diest in Brabant. Desiring to
extend the borders of the Salian Franks he advanced southwards in
the direction of the great Roman road. Before reaching it, however, he
was surprised, near the town of Helena (Hélesmes-Nord), when engaged
in celebrating the betrothal of one of his warriors to a fair-haired
maiden, by Aëtius, who exercised in the name of Rome the military
command in Gaul. He sustained a crushing defeat; the victor carried
off his chariots and took prisoner even the trembling bride. This was
about the year 431. But Clodion was not long in recovering from this
defeat. He sent spies into the neighbourhood of Cambrai, defeated the
Romans and captured the town. He had thus gained command of the
great Roman road. Then, without encountering opposition, he advanced
as far as the Somme, which marked the limit of Frankish territory.
About this period Tournai on the Scheldt seems to have become the
capital of the Salian Franks.
Clodion was succeeded in the kingship of the Franks by Merovech.
All our histories of France assert that he was the son of Clodion ; but
Gregory of Tours simply says that he belonged to the family of that
king, and he does not give even this statement as certain ; it is main-
tained, he says, by certain persons—De huius stirpe quidam Merovechum
regem fuisse adserunt. We should perhaps refer to Merovech certain
statements of the Greek historian Priscus, who lived about the middle of
the fifth century. On the death of a king of the Franks, he says, his
two sons disputed the succession. The elder betook himself to Attila to
seek his support; the younger preferred to claim the protection of the
Emperor, and journeyed to Rome. “I saw him there,” he says; "he was
still quite young. His fair hair, thick and very long, fell over his
shoulders. " Aëtius, who was at this time in Rome, received him
graciously, loaded him with presents and sent him back as a friend and
ally. Certainly, in the sequel the Salian Franks responded to the
appeal of Aëtius and mustered to oppose the great invasion of Attila,
fighting in the ranks of the Roman army at the battle of the Mauriac
Plain (A. D. 451). The Vita Lupi, in which some confidence may be
placed, names King Merovech among the combatants.
Various legends have gathered round the figure of Merovech. The
pseudo-Fredegar narrates that as the mother of this prince was sitting
by the sea-shore a monster sprang from the waves and overpowered her;
OH. X.
## p. 298 (#328) ############################################
298
Childeric
[463
and from this union was born Merovech. Evidently the legend owes its
origin to an attempt to explain the etymology of the name Merovech,
son of the sea. In consequence of this legend some historians have
maintained that Merovech was a wholly mythical personage and they
have sought out some remarkable etymologies to explain the name
Merovingian, which is given to the kings of the first dynasty ; but in
our opinion the existence of this prince is sufficiently proved, and we
interpret the term Merovingian as meaning descendants of Merovech.
Merovech had a son named Childeric. The relationship is attested
in precise terms by Gregory of Tours who says cujus filius fuit Childericus.
In addition to the legendary narratives about Childeric which Gregory
gathered from oral tradition, we have also some very precise details
which the celebrated historian borrowed from annals now no longer
extant. The legendary tale is as follows. Childeric, who was extremely
licentious, dishonoured the daughters of many of the Franks.
in the meantime advanced as far as Orleans, which Sangiban, the king
of the Alans who were settled there, promised to betray to him. The
proposed treachery, however, was frustrated, for the allies were already
on the spot before the arrival of the Huns, and had encamped in strength
before the city. Attila thought he could not venture an attack on the
strong fortifications with his troops, which principally consisted of
cavalry, so he retreated to Troyes and took up a position five miles
before that town on an extensive plain near the place called Mauriacus,
there to await a decisive battle with the Gotho-Roman army which was
following him. Attila occupied the centre of the Hun array with the
picked troops of his people, while both the wings were composed of
troops from the subjected German tribes. His opponents were so
arranged that Theodoric with the bulk of the Visigoths occupied the
right wing, Aëtius with the Romans and a part of the Goths under
Thorismud formed the left wing of the army, while the untrustworthy
Alans stood in the centre. Attila first tried to get possession of a height
commanding the battlefield, but Aëtius and Thorismud were beforehand
and successfully repulsed all the attacks of the Huns on their position.
The king of the Huns now hurled himself with great force on the
Visigothic main body commanded by Theodoric. After a long struggle
the Goths succeeded in driving the Huns back to their camp; great
losses occurred on both sides; the aged king of the Goths was among the
slain, as was also a kinsman of Attila's.
The battle however remained drawn, for both sides kept the field. The
moral effect, which told for the Romans and their allies, was, however,
very important, inasmuch as the belief that the powerful king of the
Huns was invincible had suffered a severe shock. At first it was decided
to shut up the Huns in their barricade of wagons and starve them
out. But when the body of Theodoric, who had been supposed up till
then to be among the survivors, had been found and buried, Thorismud,
who was recognised as king by the army, called upon his people to
revenge and to take the enemy's position by storm. But Aëtius, who
did not wish to let the Goths become too powerful, succeeded in per-
suading Thorismud to relinquish his scheme, advising his return to
## p. 281 (#311) ############################################
451–456]
Theodoric II
281
Toulouse, to prevent any attempt on his brother's part to get possession
of the crown by means of the royal hoard there. Thus were the Goths
deprived of the well-earned fruits of their famous exploit; the Huns
returned home unmolested (451).
Thorismud proved himself anxious to develop the national policy
adopted by his father, and in the same spirit. After he had succeeded,
for the time being, in keeping possession of the throne, he subdued the
Alans who had settled near Orleans and thereby made preparations for
extending the Gothic territory beyond the Loire. Then he tried to
bring Arles under his power, but without having attained his object he
returned once more to his country, where in the meanwhile his brothers
Theodoric (II) and Friedrich had stirred up a rebellion. After several
armed encounters Thorismud was assassinated (453).
Theodoric II succeeded him on the throne. The characteristic mark
of his rule is the close though occasionally interrupted connexion with
Rome. The treaty broken under Theodoric I—which implied the
supremacy of the Empire over the kingdom of Toulouse—was renewed
immediately after his accession to the throne. For the rest, this con-
nexion was never taken seriously by Theodoric but was principally used by
him as a means towards the attainment of that end which his predecessors
had vainly striven for by direct means—the spread of the Visigoth
dominion in Gaul and more especially in Spain. Already, in the year
454, Theodoric found an opportunity for activity in the interest of the
Roman Empire; a Gothic army under Friedrich marched into Spain
and pacified the rebellious Bagaudae ex auctoritate Romana. After
the murder of Valentinian III (March 455) Avitus went as magister
militum to Gaul to win over the most influential powers of the country
for the new Emperor, Petronius Maximus. In consequence of his
personal influence-he had formerly initiated Theodoric into the know-
ledge of Roman literature-he succeeded in bringing the king of the
Goths to recognise Maximus. When, however, soon after this, the news
of the murder of the Emperor arrived (31 May), Theodoric requested
him to take the imperium himself. On 9 July, Avitus, who had
been proclaimed Emperor, accompanied by Gothic troops marched
into Italy where he met with universal recognition. The close relations
between the Empire and the Goths came again into operation against
the Sueves. As the latter repeatedly made plundering expeditions into
Roman territory, Theodoric, with a considerable force to which the
Burgundians also added a contingent, marched over the Pyrenees in the
summer of 456, decisively defeated them and took possession of a large
part of Spain, nominally for the Empire, but actually for himself.
But the state of affairs changed at one stroke when Avitus, in the
autumn of the year 456, abdicated the purple. Theodoric had now no
longer any interest in adhering to the Empire. He had in fact required
the promotion of Avitus because he enjoyed a great reputation in Gaul
CH. X.
## p. 282 (#312) ############################################
282
Theodoric II, Euric
[457–466
and possessed there a strong support among the resident nobility.
Friendship with him could only be of use to the king of the Goths in
respect to the Roman provincials living in Toulouse. But the elevation
of the new Emperor Majorian, on 1 April 457, had occurred in direct
opposition to the wishes of the Gallo-Roman nobility to place one
of themselves upon the imperial throne. Taking advantage of the
consequent discord in Gaul, Theodoric appeared as the open foe of the
imperial power of Rome. He himself marched with an army into the
Gallic province of Narbonne and once more began with the siege of
Arles ; he also sent troops to Spain which, however, only fought with
varying success. But in the winter of 458 the Emperor appeared in
Gaul with considerable forces, quieted the rebellious Burgundians and
obliged the Visigoths to raise the blockade of Arles and again conclude
peace (spring 459).
Although in the year 461 yet another change took place on the
imperial throne, Theodoric thought it more advantageous for the time
being to maintain, at least formally, the imperial alliance. On the other
hand the chief general Aegidius, a faithful follower of Majorian,
supported by a fine army, marched against the new imperial ruler. In
the conflict which then ensued Theodoric found a favourable opportunity
for resuming his policy of expansion in Gaul. At the call of Count
Agrippinus, who was commanding in Narbonne and was hard pressed by
Aegidius, he marched into the Roman territory and quartered upon that
important town Gothic troops under the command of his brother
Friedrich (462). Driven out of southern Gaul, Aegidius turned north-
wards whither a Gothic army led by Friedrich followed him. A great
battle took place near Orleans in which the Goths suffered a severe
defeat, chiefly through the bravery of the Salian Franks, who were
opposed to them and lost their leader in the battle (463). Taking
advantage of the victory, Aegidius now began to press victoriously into
the Visigoth territory, but sudden death prevented him from carrying out
his purposes (464).
Theodoric, freed from his most dangerous enemy, did not delay
making good the losses he had suffered; but he died in the year 466
at the hand of his brother Euric, who was a champion of the anti-
Roman national party and now ascended the throne. Contemporaries
agree in describing the new king as characterised by great energy and
warlike ability. We may venture to add from historical facts that he
was also a man of distinguished political talent. The leading idea in
his policy—the entire rejection of even a formal suzerainty of the
Roman Empire-came into operation on his accession to the throne.
The embassy which he then sent off to the Emperor of Eastern
Rome can only have had for its object a request for the recognition of
the Visigoth sovereignty. As no agreement was arrived at he tried to
bring about an alliance with the Vandals and the Sueves, but the
VE
## p. 283 (#313) ############################################
467–475]
Euric
283
negotiations came to nothing when a strong East-Roman fleet appeared
in African waters (467). Euric at first pursued a neutral course, but as
the Roman expedition, set on foot with such considerable effort against
the Vandal kingdom, resulted so lamentably (468), he did not hesitate
to come forward as assailant, while he simultaneously pushed forward his
troops into Gaul and Spain (469). He opened hostilities in Gaul with
a sudden attack on the Bretons whom the Emperor had sent to
the town of Bourges ; at Déols, not far from Chateauroux, a battle
took place in which the Bretons were overthrown. Yet the Goths did
not succeed in pushing forward over the Loire to the north. Count
Paulus, supported by Frankish auxiliaries, successfully opposed them
here. Euric therefore concentrated his whole strength partly on the
conquest of the province of Aquitanica Prima, partly on the annexation
of the lower Rhone valley, especially the long-coveted Arles. The
provinces of Novempopulana and (for the most part) Narbonensis Prima
had been probably already occupied by the Goths under Theodoric II.
An army which the West-Roman Emperor Anthemius sent to Gaul
for the relief of Arles was defeated in the year 470 or 471, and for
the time being a large part of Provence was seized by the Goths. In
Aquitanica Prima, also, town after town fell into the hands of Euric's
general Victorius; only Clermont, the capital city of Auvergne, obstinately
defied the repeated attacks of the barbarians for many years. The
moving spirits in the resistance were the brave Ecdicius, a son of the
former Emperor Avitus, and the poet Sidonius Apollinaris, who had
been its bishop from about 470. The letters of the latter give us a
clear picture of the struggle which was waged with the greatest animosity
on both sides. Euric is said to have stated that he would rather give
up the much more valuable Septimania than renounce the possession of
that town. The wholly impotent Western Empire was unable to do
anything for the besieged. In the year 475 peace was at last made
between the Emperor Nepos and Euric by the intervention of Bishop
Epiphanius of Ticinum (Pavia). Unfortunately the conditions are not
more accurately known, but there can be no doubt that, besides the
previously conquered territory in Spain, the district between the Loire,
the Rhone, the Pyrenees and the two seas was relinquished to Euric in
sovereign possession. Thus Auvergne, so fiercely contended for, was
surrendered to the Goths.
But in spite of this important success the king of the Goths had by
no means reached the goal of his desires ; it may be seen from the line
of policy he followed later that the present moment seemed to him fit
for carrying out that subjection of the whole of the West which had
long since been the aim of Alaric I.
For this reason peace only lasted for a year, which was spent in
settling internal affairs. The most important event under Euric's
government at this time is the publication of a Code of Law which was
CH. X.
## p. 284 (#314) ############################################
284
Euric
[476–484
intended to settle the legal relations of the Goths, both amongst them-
selves and with the Romans who had come under the Gothic dominion.
The deposition of the last West-Roman Emperor, Romulus, by the
leader of the mercenaries, Odovacar (Sept. 476), gave the king a welcome
reason for renewing hostilities, as he looked upon the treaty made with
the Empire as dissolved. A Gothic army crossed the Rhone and
obtained final possession of the whole of southern Provence as far as the
Maritime Alps, together with the cities of Arles and Marseilles, after
a victorious battle against the Burgundians, who had ruled over this
district under Roman suzerainty. But when Euric also marched a
body of troops into Italy it suffered defeat from the officers of Odovacar.
Consequently a treaty was concluded by the East-Roman Emperor
Zeno and the king of the Burgundians whereby the newly conquered
territory in Gaul (between the Rhone and the Alps south of the
Durance) was surrendered by Odovacar to the Goths, while Euric
evidently pledged himself to undertake no further hostilities against
Italy (c. 477).
Euric was incessantly harassed by the difficulties of defending this
mighty conquest from foes without and within. In particular, very
frequent cause for interference was given by the conduct of the Catholic
clergy, who openly shewed their disloyalty, and in the Vandal kingdom
did not shrink from the most treacherous actions. Yet they seem only
in rare instances to have been answered by violence and cruelty. The
Saxon pirates who, according to old custom, infested the coast of Gaul
were vigorously punished by a fleet sent out against them. In the
same way it seems that an invasion of the Salian Franks was warded
off successfully. It is not strange that, owing to the prestige of the
Visigoth power, Euric's help was repeatedly requested by other peoples,
as by the Heruli, Warni and Tulingi who, settled in the Netherlands,
found themselves threatened by the overwhelming might of the Franks
and owed to the intervention of the Gothic king the maintenance of
their political existence. The poet Sidonius Apollinaris has left behind
a vivid description of the way in which, at that time, the representatives
of the most diverse nations pressed round Euric at the Visigoth Court,
even the Persians are said to have formed an alliance with him against the
Eastern Empire. It seems that envoys from the Roman population of
Italy also appeared at Toulouse to ask the king to expel Odovacar, whose
rule was only reluctantly endured by the Italians.
We do not know if Euric intended gratifying this last request, in
any case he was prevented from executing any such designs through
death, which overtook him in Arles in December 484. Under his son
Alaric II the Visigoth power fell from its height. To be sure, the
,
beginning of the decline originated at a time further back. Ataulf's
political programme, as already observed, had originally contemplated
the establishment of a national Gothic State in the place of the Roman
## p. 285 (#315) ############################################
484–502]
Alaric II
285
Empire. Yet not one of the Visigoth rulers, in spite of honest purpose,
could accomplish this task. It is to their credit that they succeeded at
last, after severe fighting, in freeing themselves from the suzerainty of
the Emperor and obtaining political autonomy, but the State which
thus resulted resembled a Germanic National State no more than it did a
Roman Imperium, and it could not contain the seeds of life because it was
in a great measure dependent on foreign obsolescent institutions. The
Goths had entered the world of Roman civilisation too suddenly to be
able either to resist or to absorb the foreign influences which pressed on
them from all sides. It was fortunate for the
progress
of Romanisation
that the Goths, cut off from the rest of the German world, could not
draw thence fresh strength to recuperate their nationality or to replace
their losses, and moreover that through the immense extension of the
kingdom under Euric the numerical proportion between the Roman and
Gothic population had altered very much in favour of the former. So
under the circumstances it was a certainty that the Gothic kingdom in
Gaul must succumb to the rising and politically creative power of the
Franks. Neither the personality of Alaric, who was little fitted for
ruling, nor the antagonism between Catholicism and Arianism caused
the downfall, they only hastened it.
Alaric ascended the throne on 28 December 484. The king was
of an indolent weak nature, altogether the opposite of his father, and
without energy or warlike capacity, as immediately became evident.
For example, he submitted to give up Syagrius, whom he had received
into his kingdom after the battle of Soissons (486), when the victorious
king of the Franks threatened him with war. The inevitable settlement
by arms of the rivalry between the two principal powers in Gaul was
of course only put off a little longer by this compliance. About 494
the war began. It lasted for many years and was carried on with varying
success on both sides. Hostilities were ended through the mediation
of the Ostrogoth king Theodoric-who in the meanwhile had become
Alaric's father-in-law-by the conclusion of a treaty of peace on the
terms of Uti possidetis (c. 502), but this condition could not last
long, for the antagonism was considerably aggravated by the conversion
of Clovis to the Catholic Church in the year 496 (25 Dec. ). Conse-
quently the greatest part of Alaric's Roman subjects, with the clergy of
course at their head, adhered to the Franks, and jealously endeavoured
to bring about the subjection of the Visigoth kingdom to their rule.
Alaric was obliged to adopt severe measures in some instances against
such treasonable desires, but usually he tried by gentleness and the
granting of favours to win over the Romans to his support, an attempt
which, in view of the prevalent and insurmountable antagonism, was of
course quite ineffectual and even defeated its own ends, being regarded
only as weakness. Thus he permitted the bishoprics kept vacant under
Euric to be again filled, he moreover permitted the Gallic bishops to
CH. X.
## p. 286 (#316) ############################################
286
Battle of Vouglé
[506–507
hold a Council at Agde in September 506, and—indication of the
ambiguous attitude of the clergy—it was opened with a prayer for
the prosperity of the Visigoth kingdom. The publication of the so-
called Lex Romana Visigothorum, also named Breviarium Alaricianum,
represented the most important act of conciliation. This Code of Law,
which had been composed by a commission of lawyers together with
prominent laymen and even clergy, and was drawn from extracts and
explanations of Roman law, was sanctioned by the king at Toulouse,
2 Feb. 506, after having received the approval of an assembly of
bishops and distinguished provincials, and was ordered to be used by
the Roman population in the Gothic kingdom.
Why the explosion was delayed until the year 507 is unknown. That
the king of the Franks was the aggressor is certain. He easily found a
pretext for beginning the war as champion and protector of Catholic Chris-
tianity against the absolutely just measures which Alaric took against his
treacherous orthodox clergy. Clovis had sufficiently appreciated the by
no means despicable power of the Visigoth kingdom, and had summoned
a very considerable army, one contingent of which was furnished by the
Ripuarian Franks. His allies, the Burgundians, approached from the
east in order to take the Goths in the flank. Among his allies Clovis
probably also counted on the Byzantines, who placed their fleet at his
disposal. On his part Alaric had not looked upon coming events
idly, but his preparations were hampered by the bad state of the finances
of his kingdom. In order to obtain the necessary funds he was obliged
to coin gold pieces of inferior value, which were soon discredited everywhere.
Apparently the fighting strength of the Gothic army was inferior to the
army of Clovis, but if the Ostrogoth troops, who had held out prospects
of coming, should arrive at the right time Alaric could hope to oppose
his foe successfully. The king of the Franks had to endeavour to bring
about a decisive action before the arrival of these allies. In the spring
of 507 he suddenly crossed the Loire and marched towards Poitiers,
where he probably joined the Burgundians. On the Campus Vocladensis,
ten miles from Poitiers, the Visigoths had taken up their position.
Alaric put off beginning battle because he was waiting for the Ostrogoth
troops, but as they were hindered by the appearance of a Byzantine fleet
in Italian waters he determined to fight instead of beating a retreat,
as it would have been wise to do. After a short engagement the Goths
turned and fed. In the pursuit the king of the Goths was killed, it was
said by Clovis' own hand (507). With this overthrow the rule of the
Visigoths in Gaul was ended for ever.
The principal town of the Gothic kingdom was Toulouse, where the
royal treasure was also kept; Euric from time to time also held court in
Bordeaux, Alaric II in Narbonne. The Gothic rule originally stretched,
as has been already mentioned, as far as the province of Aquitanica
## p. 287 (#317) ############################################
Goths and Romans
287
Secunda and some bordering municipalities, among which was the
district of Toulouse, but later on it extended not only over the whole
territory of the Gallic provinces, but in addition to several parts of the
provinces Viennensis, Narbonensis Secunda, Alpes Maritimae, and
Lugdunensis Tertia. The Gothic possessions included also the greater
part of the Iberian peninsula, i. e. the provinces of Baetica, Lusitania,
Tarraconensis and Carthaginensis. The provinces named were in Roman
times, in so far as it was a question of civil administration, governed by
consulares or praesides, and they were again divided into city-districts
(civitates or municipia). Under the sovereignty of the Goths this
constitution was maintained in its chief features.
The inhabitants of the kingdom of Toulouse were composed of two
races—the Goths and the Romans. The Goths were regarded by the
Romans as foreigners so long as the federal connexion remained in force,
yet both peoples lived side by side, each under its own law and jurisdic-
tion: intermarriage was forbidden. This rigid line of separation was
adhered to even when the Goths had shaken off the imperial suzerainty
and the Gothic king had become the sovereign of the native population
of Gaul. Theoretically, the Romans had equal privileges in the State;
thus they were not treated as a conquered people without rights, as
the Vandals and Langobards (Lombards) dealt with the inhabitants of
Africa and Italy. That the Goths were the real rulers was clearly enough
made manifest to the Romans.
The domestic condition of the Visigoths before the settlement in
Gaul was undoubtedly on the same level as in their original home;
private property in land was unknown, agriculture was comparatively
primitive, and cattle-rearing provided the principal means of subsistence.
A national change began with the settlement in Aquitaine. This was
done on the principle of the Roman quartering of troops, so that the
Roman landowners were obliged to give up to the Goths in free possession
a portion of their total property together with the coloni, slaves and
cattle appertaining to it. . According to the oldest Gothic codes of law
the Goth received two-thirds of the tilled land and, it seems, one-half
of the woods. The wood and the meadow land which was not partitioned
belonged to the Goths and the Romans for use in common. The parcels
of land subjected to partition were called sortes, the Roman share,
generally, tertia, their occupants hospites or consortes. The Gothic
sortes were exempt from taxation. As the invaders were very numerous
compared with the extent of the province to be apportioned, there
is no doubt that not only the large estates, but also the middle-
sized and smaller properties were partitioned. Nevertheless it is evident
that not every Goth can have shared with a Roman possessor, because
there would certainly not have been estates enough; we must rather
assume that in the share given up larger properties were split up among
several families, as a rule among kinsmen. As the apportionment of the
CH. X.
## p. 288 (#318) ############################################
288
Social Conditions
single lots undoubtedly took place through the decisive influence of the
king, it is natural that the nobility (i. e. nobility by military service) was
favoured in the partition above the ordinary freemen. The landed
property of the monarch's favourites must have gained considerably in
extent, as elsewhere, through assignments from state property. The
very considerable imperial possessions, both crown and private property,
as a rule fell to the share of royalty.
Land partition in the districts conquered later followed the same
plan as in Aquitaine ; seizures of entire Roman estates certainly occurred,
but they were exceptions and happened under special circumstances. As
a rule the Romans were protected by law in the possession of their
tertiae, even if it were only for fiscal reasons. The considerably
extended range of the Gothic kingdom offered the people ample space
for colonisation, so it was not necessary to encroach on the whole of the
Roman territory as had been the case in Aquitaine. It is to be assumed
that in the newly won territories only the superfluous element of the
population had to be provided for; we are not to suppose a general
desertion of the home-land.
The social economy proceeded, on the whole, on the same lines as
before, i. e. through coloni and slaves, from whose toil the owners derived
their principal support, at least in so far as it was a question of food.
For the Goths, whose favourite occupations were warfare and the chase,
had no inclination to devote themselves to arduous agricultural toil.
They only wanted to control directly the rearing of cattle, as they did
of old ; animal food seems to have been provided principally by means
of large herds of swine. The revolution which the partition of land
brought about in the habits of the Goths was too powerful not to exert
the deepest influence on all the conditions of life. The rich revenues
led to the display of a wanton and indolent way of living; the close
contact with the Romans, who were for the most part morally decadent,
was bound to affect injuriously a people so famous in earlier times for its
austere manners. The old national bonds of union, besides having been
relaxed through the migration, now from the scattering of the mass in
colonisation lost more and more of their original importance, since kins-
men need no longer be companions on the farmstead in order to obtain
a living. The adoption of the Roman conditions of land-holding
obliged the Goths to accept numerous legal arrangements which were
foreign to their national law and altered its principles considerably.
Nevertheless the national consciousness was strong enough to prevent
it from merging itself quickly and completely in the Roman system ; in
contrast to the Ostrogoths who did nothing but carefully conserve the
Roman institutions which they found, the Visigoths are remarkable
for an attitude in many respects independent towards the foreign
organisation.
The entire power of government lay in the hands of the king, but
## p. 289 (#319) ############################################
Political Conditions
289
the several rulers did not succeed in making their power absolute.
Outwardly the Visigoth king was only slightly distinguished from the
other freemen ; like them he wore the national skin garment, and long
curly hair. The raised seat as well as the sword appear as tokens of
royal power, the insignia such as the purple mantle and the crown do
not come till later. The succession to the throne follows the system
peculiar to the old German constitution of combined election and
inheritance. After the death of Alaric I his brother-in-law Ataulf was
chosen king ; thus a kindred connexion played an important part in
this choice. Ataulf's friendliness to Rome had placed him in opposition
to the great mass of the people; therefore his successor was not his
brother, as he had wished, but first Sigerich and then Wallia, who both
belonged to other houses. The elevation of Theodoric I is also an
instance of free election; the royal dignity remained in his house for
over a century. Thorismud was appointed king by the army; the
succession of Theodoric II, Euric and Alaric II, on the other hand, was
only confirmed by popular recognition.
Just as the people regularly took a part in the choice of the successor
to the throne, so their influence was often brought to bear on the
sovereign's conduct of government. After the settlement in Gaul there
could certainly no longer be any question of a national assembly in the
old sense of the word, especially after the great expansion of territory
under Euric. Meetings of all the freemen had become impossible on
account of the expansion of the Gothic colonies. The circle of those
who could obey the call to assemble became, therefore, smaller and
smaller, while in carrying out the principal public functions, such as
the coronation of the king, only those of the people who happened
to be present at the place of election or who lived in the immediate
neighbourhood, could as a rule take part. The importance which the
commonalty hereby lost was gained by the nobility, an aristocracy
founded on personal service to the king. It was only in the army that
the greater part of the people found opportunity of expressing its will.
It is certain that among the Visigoths, as among the Franks, regular
military assemblies were held, which at first served the purpose of reviews
and were under the command of the king. In these assemblies important
political questions were discussed; but the decision of the people was
not always for the welfare of the State.
The kingdom was subdivided very nearly on the lines of the previous
Roman divisions into provinciae, and these again into civitates (territoria).
At the head of the province was the dux as magistrate for Goths and
Romans. He was also, as his title implies, in the first place the
commander of the militia in his district, and he provided also the final
authority and appeal in matters of government, corresponding to the
Praefectus Praetorio or vicarius of imperial times.
The centre of
gravity of the government lay in the municipalities whose rulers were
19
C. MED. H. VOL. I. CH. İ.
## p. 290 (#320) ############################################
290
The Church
comites civitatum. They took exactly the place of the Roman pro-
vincial governors, so that the city-districts also appear under the title of
provinciae. Their authority extended even to the exercise of jurisdiction
with the exception of such cases as were reserved to the civic magistrates,
and included control of the police and the collection of taxes. The
dux could at the same time be comes of a civitas in his district. At
the head of the towns themselves were the curiales who, as hitherto, were
bound by oath to fill their offices; and they were personally responsible
for collecting the taxes. The most important official was the defensor,
who was chosen from among the curiales by the citizens and only con-
firmed by the king. He exercised, in the first instance, jurisdiction in
minor matters, but his activity extended over all the branches of
municipal administration. Side by side with this Roman magistrature
existed the national system which the Goths had brought with them.
The Gothic people formed themselves into bodies of thousands, five
hundreds, hundreds and tens, which also remained as personal societies
after the settlement. The millenarius, as of old, led the thousand in
war and ruled over it jointly with the heads of the hundreds both in
war and in peace. The comes civitatis and his vicar originally only
possessed jurisdiction over the Romans of his own circuit, but in Euric's
time that had so far changed that he now possessed authority to judge
the Goths as well in civil suits in conjunction with the millenarius : thus
the later condition was prepared in which the millenarius appears only
as military official. On the other hand the defensor remained a judiciary
solely for the Romans.
We know but little about the officers of the central government.
The first minister of Euric and of Alaric II was Leo of Narbonne, a
distinguished man of varied talents. His duty comprised a combination
of the functions of the quaestor sacri palatii and of the magister
officiorum at the imperial Court; he drew up the king's orders, con-
ducted business with the ambassadors and arranged the applications for
an audience. A higher minister of the royal chancery was Anianus,
who attested the authenticity of the official copies of the Lex Romana
Visigothorum and distributed them ; he seems to have answered to the
Roman primicerius notariorum or referendarius.
The organisation of the Catholic Church was not disturbed by the
Visigoth rule: rather it was strengthened. The ecclesiastical subdivision
of the land as it had developed in the last years of the Roman sway
corresponded on the whole with the political : the bishoprics, which
coincided in extent with the town districts, were grouped under metro-
politan sees, which corresponded with the provinces of the secular
administration. Since the middle of the fifth century the authority of
the Roman bishop over the Church had been generally recognised. Next
to the Pope the bishop of Arles exercised over the Gallic clergy a theo-
retically almost unlimited disciplinary power. A bishop was chosen by
,
## p. 291 (#321) ############################################
Arianism
291
the laity and the clergy of his see, and was ordained by the metropolitan
bishop of the province together with other bishops. Although the
boundaries of the Visigoth kingdom now in no way coincided with the
old provincial and metropolitan boundaries, the hitherto existing metro-
politan connexion was nevertheless not set aside, nor were the relations
of the bishops with the Pope interfered with. The Gothic government
as a rule shewed great indulgence and consideration to the Catholic
Church, which only changed to a more severe treatment when the clergy
were guilty of treasonable practices, as happened under Euric. No
organised and general persecution of the Catholics from religious
fanaticism ever took place. The Catholic Church enjoyed particularly
favourable conditions under Alaric II, who in consideration of the
threatening struggle with Clovis acknowledged the formal legal position
of the Roman Church according to the hitherto existing rules.
Hardly anything is known of the ecclesiastical organisation of the
Arians in the kingdom of Toulouse. Probably in all the larger towns
there were Arian bishops as well as orthodox ones, and no doubt in
earlier times they had been appointed by the king. Under the several
bishops were the different classes of subordinate clergy; presbyters and
deacons are mentioned as in the orthodox Church. The endowment
of the Arian Church was probably as a rule allowed for out of the
revenue; now and then confiscated Catholic churches as well as their
endowments were also made over to it. The church service was of
course held in the vernacular as it was in other German churches ; the
greater number of the clergy were therefore of Gothic nationality. The
opposition between the two creeds was also certainly a very sharp one.
Both sides carried on an active propaganda, which on the Arian side
not unfrequently seems to have been urged by force, but such ebullitions
scarcely had the support and approval of the Gothic government.
Very scanty indeed is our knowledge of the civilisation of the
kingdom of Toulouse. That the Romance element was foremost in
almost
every department has already been observed. The Goths how-
ever held to their national dress until a later period ; they wore the
characteristic skin garment which covered the upper part of the body,
and laced boots of horse-hide which reached up to the calf of the
leg; the knee was left bare. There is no doubt that the Gothic
tongue was spoken by the people in intercourse with each other;
unhappily no vestiges remain of it except in proper names. It is certain
however that a great part of the nobility, especially the higher officials,
understood Latin well. Most of the Arian clergy undoubtedly were
also masters of both languages. Latin was the language of diplomatic
intercourse and of legislation. Theodoric II was trained in Roman
literature by Avitus; Euric however understood so little of the foreign
language that he was obliged to use an interpreter for diplomatic
correspondence. Yet this king was in no way opposed to the knowledge
CH. X.
19-2
## p. 292 (#322) ############################################
292
Civilisation
and significance of classical culture. The Visigothic Court therefore
formed a haven of frequent resort for the last representatives of Roman
literature in Gaul. And the kings, from various motives, but especially
from a fondness for Roman models, would employ the art of these men
to celebrate their own deeds. Here may be named in the first place
the poet Sidonius Apollinaris who for a long time lived, first in the
Court of Theodoric II and then in that of Euric. Euric's minister Leo
also is said to have distinguished himself as a poet, historian and lawyer,
but no more of his writings have been preserved than of the rhetorician
Lampridius, who sang the fame of the Gothic royal house at the Court
of Bordeaux. But the decay of literature and of culture in general,
which had been for so long in progress in spite of the support of the
still existent schools of rhetoricians, could assuredly not be stayed by
the patronage of the Gothic kings.
(B)
THE FRANKS BEFORE CLOVIS.
Tacitus, in the de Moribus Germanorum, tells us that the Germans
claimed to be descended from a common ancestor, Mannus, son of the
earth-born god Tuisco. Mannus, according to the legend, had three
sons, from whom sprang three groups of tribes : the Istaevones, who
:
dwelt along the banks of the Rhine; the Ingaevones, whose seat was on
the shores of the two seas, the Oceanus Germanicus (North Sea) and the
Mare Suevicum (the Baltic), and in the Cimbric peninsula between; and,
lastly, more to the east and south, on the banks of the Elbe and the
Danube, the Herminones. After indicating this general division,
Tacitus, in the latter part of his work, enumerates about forty tribes,
whose customs presented, no doubt, a strong general resemblance, but
whose institutions and organisation shewed differences of a sufficiently
marked character.
When we pass from the first century to the fifth, we find that the
names of the Germanic peoples given by Tacitus have completely
disappeared. Not only is there no mention of Istaevones, Ingaevones
and Herminones, but there is no trace of individual tribes such as the
Chatti, Chauci and Cherusci; their names are wholly unknown to the
writers of the fourth and fifth centuries. In their place we find these
writers using other designations: they speak of Franks, Saxons, Alemans.
The writers of the Merovingian period not unnaturally supposed
that these were the names of new peoples, who had invaded Germany
and made good their footing there in the interval. This hypothesis
## p. 293 (#323) ############################################
Legends of the Franks
293
found favour especially with regard to the Franks. As early as Gregory
of Tours, we find mention of a tradition according to which the Franks
had come from Pannonia, had first established themselves on the right
bank of the Rhine, and had subsequently crossed the river. In the
chronicler known under the name of Fredegar the Franks are represented
as descended from the Trojans. “Their first king was Priam ; after-
wards they had a king named Friga ; later, they divided into two parts,
one of which migrated into Macedonia and received the name of
Macedonians. Those who remained were driven out of Phrygia and
wandered about, with their wives and children, for many years. They
chose for themselves a king named Francion, and from him took the
name of Franks. Francion made war upon many peoples, and after
devastating Asia finally passed over into Europe, and established himself
between the Rhine, the Danube and the sea. The writer of the Liber
Historiae combines the statements of Gregory of Tours and of the
pseudo-Fredegar, and, with a fine disregard of chronology, relates that,
after the fall of Troy, one part of the Trojan people, under Priam and
Antenor, came by way of the Black Sea to the mouth of the Danube,
sailed up the river to Pannonia, and founded a city called Sicambria.
The Trojans, so this anonymous writer continues, were defeated by the
Emperor Valentinian, who laid them under tribute and named them
Franks, that is wild men (feros), because of their boldness and hardness
of heart. After a time the Franks slew the Roman officials whose duty
it was to demand the tribute from them, and, on the death of Priam,
they quitted Sicambria, and came to the neighbourhood of the Rhine.
There they chose themselves a king named Pharamond, son of Marcomir.
This naïf legend, half-popular, half-learned, was accepted as fact
throughout the Middle Ages. From it alone comes the name of
Pharamond, which in most histories heads the list of the kings of
France. In reality, there is nothing to prove that the Franks, any
more than the Saxons or the Alemans, were races who came in from
without, driven into Germany by an invasion of their own territory.
Some modern scholars have thought that the origin of the Franks,
and of the other races who make their appearance between the third
century and the fifth, might be traced to a curious custom of the
Germanic tribes. The nobles, whom Tacitus calls principes, attached
to themselves a certain number of comrades, comites, whom they bound
to fealty by a solemn oath. At the head of these followers they made
pillaging expeditions, and levied war upon the neighbouring peoples,
without however involving the community to which they belonged.
The comes was ready to die for his chief; to desert him would have been
an infamy. The chief, on his part, protected his follower, and gave
him a war-horse, spear, etc. as the reward of his loyalty. Thus there
were formed, outside the regular State, bands of warriors united together
by the closest ties. These bands, so it is said, soon formed, in the
CA. X.
## p. 294 (#324) ############################################
294
Origin of the Franks
interior of Germany, what were virtually new States, and the former
princeps simply took the title of king. Such, according to the theory,
was the origin of the Franks, the Alemans and the Saxons. But this
theory, however ingenious, cannot be accepted. The bands were formed
exclusively of young men of an age to bear arms; among the Franks
we find from the first old men, women and children. The bands were
organised solely for war; whereas the most ancient laws of the Franks
have much to say about the ownership of land, and about crimes against
property; they represent the Franks as an organised nation with regular
institutions.
The Franks, then, did not come into Germany from without; and
it would be rash to seek their origin in the custom of forming bands.
That being so, only one hypothesis remains open. From the second
century to the fourth the Germans lived in a continual state of unrest.
The different communities ceaselessly made war on one another and
destroyed one another. Civil war also devastated many of them. The
ancient communities were thus broken up, and from their remains were
formed new communities which received new names. Thus is to be
explained why it is that the nomenclature of the Germanic peoples in
the fifth century differs so markedly from that which Tacitus has recorded.
But neighbouring tribes presented, despite their constant antagonisms,
considerable resemblances. They had a common dialect and similar
habits and customs. They sometimes made temporary alliances, though
holding themselves free to quarrel again before long and make war on
one another with the utmost ferocity. In time, groups of these tribes
came to be called by generic names, and this is doubtless the character
of the names Franks, Alemans and Saxons. These names
were not
applied, in the fourth and fifth centuries, to a single tribe, but to a group
of neighbouring tribes who presented, along with real differences, certain
common characteristics.
It appears that the peoples who lived along the right bank of the
Rhine, to the north of the Main, received the name of Franks; those
who had established themselves between the Ems and the Elbe, that of
Saxons (Ptolemy mentions the Edgoves as inhabitants of the Cimbric
peninsula, and perhaps the name of this petty tribe had passed to the
whole group); while those whose territory lay to the south of the Main
and who at some time or other had overflowed into the agri decumates
(the present Baden) were called Alemans. It is possible that, after all,
we should see in these three peoples, as Waitz has suggested, the
Istaevones, Ingaevones and Herminones of Tacitus.
But it must be understood that between the numerous tribes known
under each of the general names of Franks, Saxons and Alemans there
was no common bond. They did not constitute a single State but
groups of States without federal connexion or common organisation.
Sometimes two, three, even a considerable number of tribes, might join
## p. 295 (#325) ############################################
240–392)
Franks and Romans
295
together to prosecute a war in common, but when the war was over the
link snapped and the tribes fell asunder again.
Documentary evidence enables us to trace how the generic name
Franci came to be given to certain tribes between the Main and the
North Sea, for we find these tribes designated now by the ancient
name which was known to Tacitus and again by the later name. In
Peutinger's chart we find Chamavi qui et Pranci and there is no
doubt that we should read qui et Franci. The Chamavi inhabited the
country between the Yssel and the Ems; later on, we find them a little
further south, on the banks of the Rhine in Hamaland, and their laws
were collected in the ninth century in the document known as the Lex
Francorum Chamavorum. Along with the Chamavi we may reckon among
the Franks the Attuarii or Chattuarii. We read in Ammianus Marcellinus
(xx. 10) Rheno transmisso, regionem pervasit (Julian in A. D. 360)
Francorum quos Atthuarios vocant. Later, the pagus Attuariorum will
correspond to the country of Emmerich, of Cleves and of Xanten. We
may note that in the Middle Ages there was to be found in Burgundy, in
the neighbourhood of Dijon, a pagus Attuariorum, and it is very probable
that a portion of this tribe settled at this spot in the course of the fifth
century. The Bructeri, the Ampsivarii and the Chatti were, like the
Chamavi, reckoned as Franks. They are mentioned as such in a well-known
passage of Sulpicius Alexander which is cited by Gregory of Tours
(Historia Francorum, 11. 9). Arbogast, a barbarian general in the service
of Rome, desires to take vengeance on the Franks and their chiefs-
subreguli-Sunno and Marcomir. Consequently in midwinter of the
year 392 collecto exercitu transgressus Rhenum, Bructeros ripae proximos,
pagum etiam quem Chamavi incolunt depopulatus est, nullo unquam
occursante, nisi quod pauci ex Ampsivariis et Catthis Marcomere duce in
ulterioribus collium jugis apparuere.
It is this Marcomir, chief of the
Ampsivarii and Chatti, whom the author of the Liber Historiae makes the
father of Pharamond, though he has nothing whatever to do with the
Salian Franks.
Thus it is evident that the name Franks was given to a group of
tribes, not to a single tribe. The earliest historical mention of the
name may be that in Peutinger's chart', supposing, at least, that the words
et Pranci are not a later interpolation. The earliest mention in a
literary source is in the Vita Aureliani of Vopiscus, cap. 7. In the year
240, Aurelian, who was then only a military tribune, immediately after
defeating the Franks in the neighbourhood of Mainz, was marching
against the Persians, and his soldiers as they marched chanted this
refrain :
Mille Sarmatas, mille Francos semel et semel occidimus;
Mille Persas quaerimus.
It would be in any case impossible to follow the history of all these
1 The date of the chart is very uncertain.
CH, X
## p. 296 (#326) ############################################
296
The Salian Franks
( 358—400
sea,
Frankish tribes for want of evidence, but even if their history was known
it would be of quite secondary interest, for it would have only a remote
connexion with the history of France. Offshoots from these various
tribes no doubt established themselves sporadically here and there in
ancient Gaul, as in the case of the Attuarii. It was not however by
the Franks as a whole, but by a single tribe, the Salian Franks, that
Gaul was to be conquered ; it was their king who was destined to be the
ruler of this noble territory. It is therefore to the Salian Franks that
we must devote our attention.
The Salian Franks are mentioned for the first time in A. D. 358. In
that year Julian, as yet only a Caesar, marched against them. Petit
primos omnium Francos, eos videlicet quos consuetudo Salios appellavit
(Ammianus Marcellinus, xvII. 8). What is the origin of the name?
It was long customary to derive it from the river Yssel (Isala), or
from Saalland to the south of the Zuiderzee; but it seems much more
probable that the name comes from sal (the salt sea). The Salian
Franks at first lived by the shores of the North Sea, and were known
by this name in contradistinction to the Ripuarian Franks, who lived
on the banks of the Rhine. All their oldest legends speak of the
and the name of one of their earliest kings, Merovech, signifies sea-born.
From the shores of the North Sea the Salian Franks had advanced
little by little towards the south, and at the period when Ammianus
Marcellinus mentions them they occupied Toxandria, that is to say the
region to the south of the Meuse, between that river and the Scheldt.
Julian completely defeated the Salian Franks, but he left them in
possession of their territory of Toxandria. Only, instead of occupying
it as conquerors, they held it as foederati, agreeing to defend it against
all other invaders. They furnished also to the armies of Rome soldiers
whom we hear of as serving in far distant regions. In the Notitia
Dignitatum, in which we find a sort of Army List of the Empire drawn
up about the beginning of the fifth century, there is mention of
Salii seniores and Salii juniores, and we also find Salii figuring in the
auxilia palatina.
At the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century the
Salian Franks established in Toxandria ceased to recognise the authority
of Rome, and began to assert their independence. It was at this period
that the Roman civilisation disappeared from these regions. The Latin
language ceased to be spoken and the Germanic tongue was alone
employed. Even at the present day the inhabitants of these districts
speak Flemish, a Germanic dialect. The place-names were altered and
took on a Germanic form, with the terminations hem, ghem, seele and
zele, indicating a dwelling-place, loo wood, dal valley. The Christian
religion retreated along with the Roman civilisation, and those regions
reverted to paganism. For a long time, it would seem, these Salian
Franks were held in check by the great Roman road which led, by way
## p. 297 (#327) ############################################
431–451]
Clodion, Merovech
297
of Arras, Cambrai and Bavay, to Cologne, and which was protected by
numerous forts.
The Salians were subdivided into a number of tribes each holding a
pagus. Each of these divisions had a king who was chosen from
the most noble family, and who was distinguished from his fellow-
Franks by his long hair-criniti reges. The first of these kings to whom
we have a distinct reference bore the name of Clogio or Clojo (Clodion).
He had his seat at Dispargum, the exact position of which has not
been determined—it may have been Diest in Brabant. Desiring to
extend the borders of the Salian Franks he advanced southwards in
the direction of the great Roman road. Before reaching it, however, he
was surprised, near the town of Helena (Hélesmes-Nord), when engaged
in celebrating the betrothal of one of his warriors to a fair-haired
maiden, by Aëtius, who exercised in the name of Rome the military
command in Gaul. He sustained a crushing defeat; the victor carried
off his chariots and took prisoner even the trembling bride. This was
about the year 431. But Clodion was not long in recovering from this
defeat. He sent spies into the neighbourhood of Cambrai, defeated the
Romans and captured the town. He had thus gained command of the
great Roman road. Then, without encountering opposition, he advanced
as far as the Somme, which marked the limit of Frankish territory.
About this period Tournai on the Scheldt seems to have become the
capital of the Salian Franks.
Clodion was succeeded in the kingship of the Franks by Merovech.
All our histories of France assert that he was the son of Clodion ; but
Gregory of Tours simply says that he belonged to the family of that
king, and he does not give even this statement as certain ; it is main-
tained, he says, by certain persons—De huius stirpe quidam Merovechum
regem fuisse adserunt. We should perhaps refer to Merovech certain
statements of the Greek historian Priscus, who lived about the middle of
the fifth century. On the death of a king of the Franks, he says, his
two sons disputed the succession. The elder betook himself to Attila to
seek his support; the younger preferred to claim the protection of the
Emperor, and journeyed to Rome. “I saw him there,” he says; "he was
still quite young. His fair hair, thick and very long, fell over his
shoulders. " Aëtius, who was at this time in Rome, received him
graciously, loaded him with presents and sent him back as a friend and
ally. Certainly, in the sequel the Salian Franks responded to the
appeal of Aëtius and mustered to oppose the great invasion of Attila,
fighting in the ranks of the Roman army at the battle of the Mauriac
Plain (A. D. 451). The Vita Lupi, in which some confidence may be
placed, names King Merovech among the combatants.
Various legends have gathered round the figure of Merovech. The
pseudo-Fredegar narrates that as the mother of this prince was sitting
by the sea-shore a monster sprang from the waves and overpowered her;
OH. X.
## p. 298 (#328) ############################################
298
Childeric
[463
and from this union was born Merovech. Evidently the legend owes its
origin to an attempt to explain the etymology of the name Merovech,
son of the sea. In consequence of this legend some historians have
maintained that Merovech was a wholly mythical personage and they
have sought out some remarkable etymologies to explain the name
Merovingian, which is given to the kings of the first dynasty ; but in
our opinion the existence of this prince is sufficiently proved, and we
interpret the term Merovingian as meaning descendants of Merovech.
Merovech had a son named Childeric. The relationship is attested
in precise terms by Gregory of Tours who says cujus filius fuit Childericus.
In addition to the legendary narratives about Childeric which Gregory
gathered from oral tradition, we have also some very precise details
which the celebrated historian borrowed from annals now no longer
extant. The legendary tale is as follows. Childeric, who was extremely
licentious, dishonoured the daughters of many of the Franks.
