Search This Blog

Friday, 15 January 2016

Clovis, Towards a new Chronology part seven.

 Cholodoeus Rex Bellorum - the battles of  Tolbiac, Vouille and the death of Clovis.



506 The Battle of Tolbiac.

Alaric settled into peace well, and after dealing with the the last of the rebellions in his Spanish territory in 506, he called his first Aquitanian Religious Council at Agde. There he courted the support of Catholic Bishops and elsewhere promulgated new laws (Wood p.146). The Arians were actually very sympathetic towards Catholicism in their territories at this time, the purges of Euric long in the past; Gregory's picture of them totally at odds with the evidence.
Clovis by this time had turned north-eastwards again as the Allemani had by then become a problem in the Frankish Germanic provinces and needed action. In concert with other Frankish kings, like Sigibert of Cologne in Germania Secunda, he fought one major battle at Zulpich near Cologne, otherwise known as the Battle of Tolbiac against the Alamanni, defeating them after a hard struggle and killing their king. Sigibert's leg was injured in this battle and he became known as Sigibert the Lame.
Archaeology supports placing the battle at this time. In the early sixth century bow brooches of the developed Alamannic base form also appeared on the left side of the Rhine, in Francia. These could be termed Alamannic-Frankish and were apparently worn by Alamannic, as well as Frankish women. This basic form was then evident from the Seine to eastern Bavaria, showing how Frankish and Alamannic dress merged in upper class women1.
Gregory claims that Clovis, during a difficult time in this battle, asked for help from Christ and that victory came from this request and that Clovis subsequently converted to Catholicism soon after. I think this can now be safely dispatched to the graveyard of hagiographical invention. Shanzer has shown that Gregory did not even know when the battle was2. We could however suggest that there may have been a tradition, after the battle, that as a Catholic king, Clovis did indeed ask for help from his Christian God. If so, Gregory just used this anecdote to link it with his created baptism story.
GC518 places the battle of Tolbiac in the fifteenth year of Clovis which is 503, just two or three years out of place, but CC511 in 496, which as many scholars have noted, is woefully unsupported.
Theoderic congratulated Clovis on this victory over the Alamanni in a letter composed by Cassiodorus in early 507 but asked Clovis to show leniency towards the survivors and refugees who had fled to Theoderic's territory and to refrain from attacking them further in a veiled threat :

Theoderic to Luduin, King the Franks.

“Congratulations on your recent victories over the Alamanni. The ties of affinity between us are powerful (Theodoric having married the sister of Clovis). You have stirred up the nation of the Franks to new and successful encounters. It is a memorable triumph that the impetuous Alaman should be struck with such terror as even to beg for his life. Let it suffice that that King with all the pride of his race should have fallen: let it suffice that an innumerable people should have been doomed either to the sword or to slavery. I recommends that your men do not harm the panic-stricken refugees who have fled to my lands. I have always found that those wars were prosperously waged, which were ended moderately.”

Gregory must have known this as he states : " When the king had forbidden further war, and praised his soldiers, he told the queen how he had won the victory by calling on the name of Christ3 Theoderic appears to have settled the Alamanni in Rhetia, a province just north of Italy.

507. The Battle of Vouillé.

With the defeat of the Alamans Clovis marched back into Gaul in 507 intent on taking on the Visigoths with the help of his grateful Frankish allies like Chloderic, the son of Sigibert the Lame. Mathisen and Sivan suggest that Clovis launched the offensive in the spring of 507 because Clovis had trouble crossing the river Vienne due to heavy rains and one of Clovis' soldiers was punished for stealing hay from a poor man in Tours, which would not have been a problem in the summer4. However, following the battle Clovis had wintered in Bordeaux before taking Anguoeleme and Toulouse in 508 and Gundobad had not reached Barcelona until 508 as well. If they had attacked in the Spring surely Clovis would have had time to take Toulouse and Anguoeleme unless we envisage a long siege of Bordeaux, which is not evident from the record. So although spring seems plausible an autumn or winter offensive cannot be ruled out, especially as Clovis would have recently defeated the Alamanni possibly in late 506 or early 507. King Theoderic wrote to Clovis trying to prevent the war :

Theoderic to Luduin, King the Franks.

“The affinities of kings ought to keep their subjects from the plague of war. We are grieved to hear of the paltry causes which are giving rise to rumours of war between you and our son Alaric, rumours which gladden the hearts of the enemies of both of you. Let me say with all frankness, but with all affection, just what I think: "It is the act of a passionate man to get his troops ready for action at the first embassy which he sends." Instead of that refer the matter to our arbitration. It would be a delight to me to choose men capable of mediating between you. What would you yourselves think of me if I could hear unmoved of your murderous intentions towards one another? Away with this conflict, in which one of you will probably be utterly destroyed. Throw away the sword which you wield for my humiliation. By what right do I thus threaten you? By the right of a father and a friend. He who shall despise this advice of ours will have to reckon us and our friends as his adversaries. I send two ambassadors to you, as I have to my son Alaric, and hope that they may be able so to arrange matters that no alien malignity may sow the seeds of dissension between you, and that your nations, which under your fathers have long enjoyed the blessings of peace, may not now be laid waste by sudden collision. You ought to believe him who, as you know, has rejoiced in your prosperity. No true friend is he who launches his associates, un-warned, into the headlong dangers of war.”

The argument between Alaric and Clovis, according to Theoderic, was a “paltry matter” and may have been the substandard debased coinage that Alaric had paid his tribute with. Alternatively it could have been Alaric's propensity to exile Catholic Bishops from Tours into captivity and death. In 507 Verus had suffered a similar fate to his predecessor Volusianus ten years earlier. Clovis was now Catholic and held Tours in great regard as Gregory implies and if Alaric had reneged on a pledge to treat the catholic Bishops with respect Clovis may have used this event as a cause for war. Theoderic also wrote to Alaric trying to prevent the war:

Theoderic to Alaric, King of the Visigoths

“Surrounded as you are by an innumerable multitude of subjects, and strong in the remembrance of their having turned back Attila, still do not fight with Clovis. War is a terrible thing, and a terrible risk. The long peace may have softened the hearts of your people, and your soldiers from want of practice may have lost the habit of working together on the battlefield. Ere yet blood is shed, draw back if possible. We are sending ambassadors to the King of the Franks to try to prevent this war between our relatives; and the ambassadors whom we are sending to you will go on to Gundibad, King of the Burgundians, to get him to interpose on behalf of peace. Your enemy will be mine also.”

Clovis appears to have approached Gundobad with an alliance, promising a division of Aquitanian possessions. This would explain the silence by Gundobad when Theoderic wrote to him in 507 trying to avert war. In this letter Theoderic repeats the arguments about the ill effects of war and says that it is Theoderic's part to moderate the angry impulses of 'regii juvenes.' As well as trying to enrol Gundobad against Clovis, Theoderic also wrote to the Thuringians5, Warni and Heruli seeking an alliance :

Theoderic to the Kings of the Heruli, Warni and Thuringians.

“If Clovis succeeds in his unprovoked aggression on Alaric, none of his neighbours will be safe. 'I will tell you just what I think: he who inclines to act without law is prepared to shake the kingdoms of all of us. 'Remember how often Alaric's father Euric gave you presents and staved off war from your borders. Repay to the son the kindness of the father. I send you two ambassadors, and I want you to join your representations to mine and Gundibad's, calling on Clovis to desist from his attacks on Alaric and seek redress from the law of nations, or else expect the combined attack of all of us, for this quarrel is really the quarrel of us all.”

Theoderic's efforts were to no avail, Clovis and Gundobad would launch a two pronged attack. Gundobad would attack southern Visigothic possessions in Provence and Narbonensis and Clovis would approach from the north to meet Alaric at Poitiers. Theoderic, tied up in Italy with the approach of a Byzantine fleet that harried the coast, could not help Alaric6. Before progressing to the battle, Clovis issued orders that protected Catholic Church lands and the rights of Bishops and this letter is further confirmation he was already a baptised Catholic. He wrote to them in around 508 to remind them of his orders :

King Clovis to the saint seigneurs and to the bishops very dignified by the apostolic see.

“The news having been announced concerning that which was done and ordered to all our army, before we entered the homeland of the Goths, this could not have escaped Your Beatitude.
Firstly, we order, in that which concerns the service of all the churches, that nobody should try to take away in any way either saint nuns or the widows of which we know that they were dedicated to the service of the Lord; that it may be the same for the clerics and the children of the aforementioned, both of clerics and of widows of which we know that they reside with them in their homes; the same, for the slaves of churches for whom it will be proven by the oaths of bishops that they were taken from the churches, the order to follow is to exercise no harm or violence towards them.
This is why we order, so that all this may be well known, that whoever among the aforementioned will have suffered the violence of captivity, either in the churches or outside of them, be totally and immediately given back. For the other lay prisoners that will have been taken outside of peace and that this be proven, we will not refuse letters written upon your decision for whom you will desire it. In effect, for those that will have been seized in our peace whether clerics or laymen, if you make it known to be true by letters signed with your seals, may they may be sent to us in any way and you will learn that the orders issued by us will confirm it.
Thus our people demand that, for all those that you judge worthy of your letters, you will not hesitate to say under oath in the name of God and with your benediction that this thing is true that needed to be proved, since the variations and falsifications of many were discovered to the point that, as it is written: “the just perish with the impious”. Pray for me, saint seigneurs and very dignified fathers by the apostolic see.”

Whether Alaric split his forces and hence lost the battle to Clovis due to this two pronged attack is unknown but he called upon the Auvernians to help, and the Catholic Apollinaris arrived with a force from Clermont to aid the Arian Visigoths at Vouillé. Clearly not a war of religion then. The Auvernians were slaughtered but Apollinaris escaped. Clovis at the tenth milestone from Poitiers7, crossed a river and prepared for battle. According to Gregory the armies held off for a while as they skirmished. Eventually battle was joined and the Visigoths with their allies soundly beaten. Alaric was killed in the engagement by Clovis but then Clovis himself was nearly killed by two Visigoths who struck at him with their lances8. His armour saved him, but injured, he was able to withdraw thanks to his fast horse.
The Burgundians took the cities of Provence (although Arles held out) and went into Spanish territory as far as Barcelona by 508. Clovis, taking Poitiers progressed southwards taking Bordeaux. He then wintered in Bordeaux, a very cold one where rivers all over Gaul froze, before taking Anguoeleme and Toulouse in 508. Gregory relates that the walls of Anguoeleme fell down as Clovis approached9. There was indeed a major earthquake in early 508 in northern Italy that may have been felt as far away as the Aquitanian fault around Anguoeleme. The Gallic Chronicle of 511 puts it this way :

“Alaric, King of the Goths, was killed by the Franks. Toulouse was burned by the Franks and Burgundians and Barcelona was taken by Gundobad, king of the Burgundians. King Gesalicus returned to Spain, his forces having experienced their worse defeat.”

According to Gregory, after Vouillé Clovis sent his son Theuderic to claim Albi, Rodez and Clermont for the Franks.

Dating Vouillé

How did the date for Vouille get so confused. Gregory in CC511 gives the correct 25th year so, 507. But the proposed interpolator's scheme to moved these events into a different time-scale. The date for the battle of Vouillé is very secure. The Gallic chronicle of 511 doesn't give dates, but places the battle before 511.
The fragmented Chronicle of Saragossa, which only exists as marginal notes in the chronicles of Victor of Tunnuna and John of Biclarum,10 bases its dates at this time on consular years and places Vouillé in 507. Other circumstantial evidence comes from the actions of King Theoderic, who successfully launched retaliatory attacks from mid 509 onwards against the new Burgundian and Frankish possessions in southern Gaul and Spain. By 511 he had taken over the regency of the Visigothic empire in Spain. The new Visigothic King Gessalic, the illegitimate son of Alaric, exiled in 508, had returned at this time but was then captured and killed by Theoderic. Theoderic had supported the other son of Alaric, the juvenile Amalaric, his grandson, but he was too young to rule. Also, Alaric had called for a synod at Toulouse in 507/8 which never took place. The earthquake that shook Anguoeleme in 508 is also evidence. There can be no question then that the battle took place in 507.
So why was there an effort to move the battle to 513? There were probably several reasons. The first answer may lie in efforts to confirm when Clovis was awarded the honorary consulate; the second, for it to agree with the interpolated five year segments, and the third, to hide the defeat of Clovis by the Arian Theoderic and his death in 511. Gregory states that Anastasius awarded the Consulate soon after the battle. The only year available in the west with no consul was 514. Cassiodorus, who on Theoderic's behalf had tried to prevent the war, was the eastern consul. Did the interpolator therefore have a consular list and decided to move it to 513/14 to satisfy his desire to place Clovis' subsequent `consulship' in an empty year?
He further states that the battle took place around the twenty-fifth year of Clovis' reign, which would be 513 in the interpolated chronology. The five year segments were the fifth year Syagrius, tenth year Thuringians, fifteenth year Alamanni and twenty-fifth Vouillé. He obviously missed out the twentieth year, 509, which would actually have been much closer to the real date for Vouillé. Why? Because this was the year Clovis was defeated by the Arian Theoderic in southern Gaul. As Clovis was being portrayed as the Catholic saviour and defeater of Arianism, he had to hide this defeat. In doing so Vouillé was sent to a position six years later, but this would create an hiatus in the chronology and cause much confusion.

508 Honorary Consulship and Patriciate

Gregory tells us that after the battle of Vouillé, Clovis was awarded an honorary consulate. By this time Clovis was in Tours near the Loire :

“Clovis received an appointment to the consulship from the emperor Anastasius, and in the church of the blessed Martin he clad himself in the purple tunic and chlamys, and placed a diadem on his head. Then he mounted his horse, and in the most generous manner he gave gold and silver as he passed along the way which is between the gate of the entrance [of the church of St. Martin] and the church of the city, scattering it among the people who were there with his own hand, and from that day he was called consul or Augustus. Leaving Tours he went to Paris and there he established the seat of his kingdom. There also Theuderic came to him”

Mathisen has argued that it would have included a Patricianship, suggesting that Clovis would need to be ranked as high or higher than Gundobad who had been awarded the Patriciate and this may well be the case11.
Mathisen also successfully deals with the diadem sent to pope Hormisdas by Clovis, showing it was an invention on Hincmar's part, that subsequently found it's way into the Liber Pontificalis.12

509. The revenge of Theoderic

Following the battle of Vouillé, King Theoderic sent his armies in late June 509 to retake the cities in Provence and Narbonensis, writing a stirring letter to his countrymen, here is a part :

Theoderic to all the Goths

“To the Goths a hint of war rather than persuasion to the strife is needed, since a warlike race such as ours delights to prove its courage. In truth, he shuns no labour who hungers for the renown of valour. Therefore with the help of God, whose blessing alone brings prosperity, we design to send our army to the Gauls for the common benefit of all, that you may have an opportunity of promotion, and we the power of testing your merits; for in time of peace the courage which we admire lies hidden, and when men have no chance of showing what is in them, their relative merits are concealed. We have therefore given our commander, Nandius, instructions to warn you that, on the eighth day before the kalends of next July, you move forward to the campaign in the name of God, sufficiently equipped, according to your old custom, with horses, arms, and every requisite for war. Thus will ye at the same time show that the old valour of your sires yet dwells in your hearts, and also successfully perform your King's command...”

The Burgundians bore the brunt of his anger losing not only Provence but territory in Burgundy. Clovis though appears to have hung onto his central possessions and Bordeaux. In 509 Clovis would have been busy defending as best he could his new Gallic possession against the wrath of Theoderic and having lost them returned to the north. Theoderic though appears to have abated once Provence and Narbonensis were re-taken, preventing Clovis direct access to the Mediterranean. He rewarded the citizens of Arles for their stoic defence and rebuilt other cities. Theoderic then in 510-511 exempted citizens of the newly repossessed provinces from tax. This shows the recovery of those provinces must have happened between June 509 and August 510:

King Theoderic to all the Provincials settled in Gaul.

“We wish promptly to relieve all the distresses of our subjects, and we therefore at once announce to you that the districts ravaged by the incursions of the enemy will not be called upon to pay tribute at the fourth Indiction [Sept. 510, to Aug. 511]. For we have no pleasure in receiving what is paid by a heavy-hearted contributor. The part of the country, however, which has been untouched by the enemy will have to contribute to the expense of our army. But a hungry defender is a weak defender.”

For his part, Clovis had made Paris the new capital of his expanded Kingdom in 508 and his son Theuderic joined him there.


511. The Council of Orleans13

After 509/10, with no further aggression from Theoderic, Clovis was to emulate Alaric and hold his first religious council at Orleans in 511. Inviting Bishops from many of his new Aquitanian possessions as well as those from the provinces of the three Lugdunensi and southern Belgica II he formulated with them how Arian churches would be converted and incorporated into the Catholic system of administration. After the successful council and the establishment of new Salic laws to deal with his expanded Frankish empire, Clovis then turned to establishing himself as the only King of the Franks. He was certainly “king by right of war”. This leaves a particular problem. How would Clovis conceivably fit in the consolidation of his empire as described by Gregory, where he kills off all the other kings and his relatives? We have seen that in 508/9 he was organising his victory and honorary Consulship at Tours and in 509 he was defending and losing his Aquitanian possessions to Theoderic, then by 510 was organising events that culminated in the Council of Orleans in 511. He was now at the height of his power, conqueror of Gaul and leader of an empire that would give birth to modern day France. Remigius commented that Clovis was “Regionum Praesul, custus patriae, gentium triumphato” – Leader of the Provinces, protector of his country, celebrated by his people.14

 
Attendees at the First Council of Orleans in 511
Bishops in bold attended the second council of Orleans in 533.
Civitatis
Bishop
Ambiani (Amiens)
Edibius
Andecavis (Angers)
Eustochius
Ecolisnum (Angoulême)
Lupicinius
Auscis (Auch)
Nicetius
Autissiodoro (Auxerre)
Theodosius
Abrincates (Avranches)
Nepus
Burdegala (Bordeaux)
Cyprianus
Betoregas (Bourges)
Tetradius
Cadurcis (Cahors)
Boetius
Carnotis (Chartres)
Aventinus
Arvernis (Clermont)
Eufrasius
Constantia (Coutances)
Leontianus
Elosa (Eauze)
Leontius
Ebroicas (Évreux)
Maurusio
Cenomannis (Le Mans)
Principius
Nammetis (Nantes)
Epiphanius
Veromandui (Noyon)
Sophronius
Aurelianis (Orléans)
Eusebius
Oxommo (Uxuma)
Litharedus
Parisius (Paris)
Heraclius
Petrocoriis (Périgueux)
Cronopius
Redonis (Rennes)
Melanius
Rutenis (Rodez)
Quintianus
Rotomo (Rouen)
Gildaredus
Sanctonis (Saintes)
Petrus
Silvanectis (Senlis)
Livanius
Suessionis (Soissons)
Lupus
Turonus (Tours)
Licinius
Trecas (Troyes)
Camilianus
Vasaticae (Bazas)
Sextilius
Veneticae (Vannes)
Modestus
Pectavae (Poitier)
Adelphius


511. The Death of Clovis, aged 38.

No Bishops from northern Belgica Secunda, Belgica Prima or Germania Secunda attended the Council in 511 showing that at that time they were not within his jurisdiction. So he, or someone, certainly did have to bring these territories under his power for them to be passed on to Theuderic his son. Gregory portrays these events as happening in the later years of his life but there are no later years in CC511 chronology to fit them in after 511. The answer may be that he had already bequeathed those territories to Theuderic before 511 and so they were now in his jurisdiction but why would he prevent Bishops going to the Council of his father? So we are left with only one option, Clovis did not undertake this consolidation mentioned by Gregory and this was instead carried out by his son Theuderic. It's possible Clovis had started the offensive with his son in 511 but was killed in an early battle with one of the kings. We know that by 521 Theuderic ruled these regions with his son Theudebert, as Danes under Chlochiliac had invaded and the young valiant Theudebert saw them off in a sea battle15.
It has always seemed a little strange that Clovis, a good Catholic king who had defended the faith successfully would then turn on his very kin that had brought him to power. Take away these questionable consolidations, that surely would have been mentioned in letters, especially the one where Remigius and Clovis are criticised16, and we are left with a good Christian king who strove to extend his Catholic kingdom, defeating pagans and Arian Visigoths along the way. In any event Clovis would not need to remove his relatives as he was the heriditary king of the Franks by rights anyway. This had been clear since the time of Chlodio when his two sons chose their alliances on his death. I proposed Childeric had inherited the kingship from Chlodio, and from Childeric so did Clovis.
There is an hiatus in the work of Gregory between 511 and 51617 and it must have been during this period that Theuderic and his borthers consolidated the Belgic and Germanic provinces under their rule. Gregory does not portray Theuderic in a good light following the death of Clovis, whereas he lavishes praise on Theudebert his son. This goes beyond the mere illegitimacy of Theuderic due to his concubine mother and suggests Gregory took these consolidations and applied them to Clovis to enlarge his accomplishments and in so doing lessen Theuderic's, weaving tales of sin and morals to pass on to his readers18. Theuderic's ruthlessness was also evident later in the 530's when he laid waste the Auvergne in revenge for them accidentally inviting in Childeric due to a rumour that Theuderic had been killed in battle.
Whether the consolidation happened the way Gregory relates is unlikely. Clovis' other children were too young to take part in this consolidation except perhaps Chlodomer, the eldest, who was around seventeen. For these reasons I will leave out the story of the consolidation as portrayed by Gregory. In reality most of the Kings, like Clovis, had probably passed away by this time and possibly sons too in the many battles. With many of them actual relatives of Clovis, the next in line to the portions of those territories could have fallen to one of Clovis' sons. If so Theudebert was quick to assert his authority and expand his kingdom eastwards.
Neither Gregory, or any other source, mentions how Clovis died. He had made many enemies on his way to total power. He would be about thirty-eight years of age. The only possibilities are that he died as a result of his wars against the other northern kings, as above, or he suffered an illness and died, or that he was assassinated, usually by poison, a typical Roman execution. That Gregory is silent about his death suggests that he died as a result of war against pagans or war or poisoning by Arians, Theoderic the Great comes to mind. Take your pick.

1Fries-Knoblach, Janine. Steuer, Heiko. Hines, John. The Baiuvarii and Thuringi: An Ethnographic Perspective Boydell Press, 2014, Ch.8, Max Martin, Ethnic Identities as Constructions of Archaeology(?) The Case of the Thuringi, p.253
2Ibid Shanzer, Dating the baptism of Clovis. pg.52 Greg states “at some time or other
3Greg. Histories II.30
4Ibid Ferreiro, Mathisen, Sivan, 2012 p.60
5As mentioned previously, the Thuringians would not have been approached if they, like the Alamanni had recently been defeated, so the Thuringian battle must be placed much earlier.
6Ibid Daley, 1994, p.644. “Meanwhile the imperial fleet approached the Italian coastline. Its arrival prevented him from moving north in time to aid his son-in-law when Clovis invaded the Visigothic kingdom”
7I agree with Mathisen that Vouile is the correct location for the battle. Ibid Ruricus of Limages P.17
8According to Gregory.
9Greg. Histories II.37
10Ibid Collins p.33
11Mathisen, Ralph W., Clovis, Anastasius, and Political Status in 508, C.E.The Frankish Aftermath of the Battle of Vouillé. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
12Ibid Mathisen :“Likewise, in the 9th century Hincmar of Reims, in his life of Remigius, presented his own version of Gregory’s account, in which Gregory’s diadem likewise was replaced by a “jewelled golden crown.”Hincmar then took the story one step further, continuing, “In the time of the pontificate of the sainted Hormisdas, the aforementioned glorious King Clovis sent to Saint Peter, at Remigius’s suggestion, a crown, of gold with gems, which was usually called ‘Kingship’ [Regnum or Regnus].” This report is repeated in the Liber pontificalis, which reports, for the papacy of Hormisdas”
13 Table of attendees and their sees is in the appendix.
14Delgado, Noel Lazaro, Ph.D The Grand Testamentum of Remigius of Reims: Its authenticity, juridical acta and bequeathed property University of Minnesota, 2008 P.30. Alternative “governor of the region, guardian of the land and conqueror of the pagans
15 Bachrach, Bernard S. Merovingian Military Organization, 481-751 Minnesota University Press , 1972, p.18
16 Criticised by Heraclius, Leontianus and Theodosius. To be discussed below in chapter on the Bishops and full letter is in the appendix.
17Book III of Histories starts in 516 with the death of Gundobad.
18 The greed and patricide of Chloderic, the cowardice of Chararic and benevolence of Clovis and the debauchery of Ragnachar and greed of his Lords.

Sunday, 2 August 2015

Clovis, Towards a New Chonology, Part Six

Chlodoveo Rex Bellorum, The Visigothic, Thuringian and Burgundian wars


 By Dane R. Pestano ©2015.

497 Second Letter of Remigius to Clovis on death of Albofled.

Bishop Remigius wrote to Clovis a second time on learning of the death of Clovis' Sister Albofled. She had been baptised with Clovis in 496 but then subsequently died, according to Gregory, shortly afterwards. Many commentators suggest the letter was written a fair time (as much as 20 years later in some cases based on an early chronology) after the first letter of Remigius, which I have dated to 493. I date it a mere four years after the first. Clovis had fallen into a stupor of sadness and was perhaps neglecting his kingdom allowing the Visigoths to recapture cities on the Loire. Remegius' letter :
I grieve, I grieve very deeply, for the sorrow that afflicts you because your sister of resplendent memory, Albofled, has passed on. But we can be consoled by the fact that a person such as she who has departed from the light of this world merits veneration more than lamentation. Her life was such that it may be believed that, as one of God's elect who has emigrated to heaven, she was taken up to himself by the Lord. She lives, and if you desire to see her again, Christ lives in your faith. She has accomplished the fulfillment that is the blessing of virginity. It is a consecrated state, not to be mourned, glowing in the sight of God as a virginal flower or, if you prefer, her head bears the crown that she received as a reward for her virginity. Let it not happen that the faithful lament her who merited to become the aroma of Christ so that through him, whom she has pleased, she can provide help to those who seek it. My lord, put sadness out of your heart. Once your soul has become reconciled through due religious observance, govern the kingdom with keener wisdom and adopt nobler counsel out of zeal for tranquillity. With joyful heart, strengthen the members.” 1a
Remigius still speaks of Clovis' possession as a kingdom, rather than describing him as a conqueror of nations as he does in a subsequent letter written after Clovis' death that mentions the king. This would suggest the letter was written after 496 but before 507 when Clovis had defeated the Visigoths. I have chosen 497 as this appears to be the time when Clovis let slip his concentration and the Visigoths were able to go on the offensive, giving rise to challenges from the Thuringians soon after. Gregory also places the death of Albofled shortly after her baptism.

498. The first Visigothic war: Part 2.

Now into the sixth installment and we are still not out of the fifth century. Clovis taking the time out to be Baptised and then mourning the death of his sister meant losing focus on Aquitania.The Visigoths were able to regroup and recover possessions lost. In 496, a continuation of the Chronicle of Prosper relates that Alaric retook Saintes1, and then in the following year had ended a rebellion in one of his Spanish cities. Refugees, who had started leaving Aquitania, had by 497 taken settlements there, from the Chronicle of Saragossa: the Goths acquired settlements in Spain2. Tours had also admitted the Franks, as when it fell back into Visigothic hands in 497, their terrified Bishop Volusianus3 was dragged off to Toulouse and then Spain where he died4. This can only mean that Alaric had refused to hand over Syagrius and that Clovis launched campaigns into Aquitania to force his hand. MacGeorge, in Late Roman Warlords (2002) agrees stating, “it is possible that Syagrius was not surrendered by the Goths until some years after his defeat.” Mathisen continues the story of this early Frankish-Visigothic war : 
“The recapture of Saintes by the Visigoths in 496 did not, however, mark the end of Frankish attacks, for the same chronicle notes, under the year 498, “In the fourteenth year of Alaric the Franks captured Bordeaux and transferred it from the authority of the Goths into their own possession, having taken captive the Gothic duke Suatrius.””5
 So Clovis, now a Catholic King, had resumed the war and taken Bordeaux in 498. We must assume that territory north of Saints and Bordeaux and immediately south of the Loire had possibly already been re-taken; places such as Tours, Bourges and Poitiers, but this is not certain..

Mathisen sees these events as a failure by Clovis to defeat the Visigoths at this time, which has some merit, but when the battle of Soissons is placed in the correct time-frame of 491 (rather than 486) we can see that the Visigothic war follows the flight of Syagrius to Alaric. All these events then make perfect sense. Contrary to Gregory's statement that the Goths were accustomed to be terrified, they had in fact recovered well against Clovis but had not yet faced him in open battle.

 499. Defeat of the Thuringians

Gregory states in the Histories, that in around the tenth year of his reign Clovis fought a war against the Thuringians, which in the GC518 scheme would be 498 (but in CC511 490), which along with all his chronological schemes was unlikely as Clovis was tied up in Aquitania taking Bordeaux in 498. It was not in the 505/6 during the campaigns against the Alamanni as Theoderic did not mention the Thuringians when he congratulated Clovis on victory. Also, in 507 Theoderic called on the Thuringians (as well as the Heruli and Warni) to ally against the Franks. It is unlikely he would have called on the Thuringians in such a way if they had recently been defeated by Clovis. In around 499 then Clovis appears to have moved against the Thuringians who were probably encroaching from Germania I or II towards Belgica II. What prompted this Thuringian aggression? Perhaps dynastic pretensions played a part. Clovis was half Thuringian and they may have thought that while he was tied up in the west they could expand their territory towards Belgica II. Some Thuringians had been Christian since the fifth century but most likely Arian. Whether they were or not, Clovis would show his authority by defeating them in battle and sending their remnants back over the Rhine. The defeat of the Thuringians though left a void that was to be filled by the Allemani who expanded their influence and would soon threaten northern Gaul.
Clovis' next move was to intervene in around 500AD in the Burgundian civil wars between Kings Gundobad and Godigisel. Fredegar places Clovis at Troyes near the Burgundian border at this time. It is therefore not surprising that Clovis now joined with Godigisel in trying to defeat Gundobad in the Burgundian civil wars. Clovis was now Catholic, as was Godigisel. Gregory explains it as Godigisel asking for help after hearing of Clovis' recent victories, (presumably over the Visigoths and Thuringians) and if he did, then it was most certainly because he knew that Clotilda would convince Clovis to support such a move. 

Gregory states that the Burgundians had taken Marseilles by this time, although this date in GC518 could be as late as 504. It could be possible that whilst Clovis in the late 490's was taking western Visigothic possessions, the Burgundians may have taken the opportunity to expand into Provence. They appear to have besieged Arles in around 505 and Sigismund is supposed to have visited Provence around the same time6. Perhaps though these events should be dated to the 507 when we know they certainly invaded Provence.

500-501 The Burgundian Civil War

Clovis then, in around 500-501CE took his army forward into Burgundy to support Godigisel in his first Catholic crusade. This would leave his newly won Aquitanian possessions open to Alaric again, so he would have to be quick. Clovis and Godigisel defeated Gundobad, who had known nothing of their alliance, in a battle near Dijon, and Gundobad then fled to Avignon, whilst Godigisel went to Vienne to secure Gundobad's city. Clovis negotiated a yearly tribute with Gundobad after besieging him for a while in Avignon. Gregory's story of revenge for the death of Clotilda's parents making no sense in the light of this outcome. Gregory states that the tribute and submission was brokered by one of Gundobad's counselors, Aridius. It may have suited Clovis though to make this agreement as Alaric by this time in 501/2 may have started retaking his Aquitanian possessions. This forced Clovis to abandon the Burgundian civil war quickly, albeit with a sack full of coin, leaving Godigisel exposed. The unfortunate Godigisel, now considered a traitor by his people, was then soon defeated and killed by Gundobad and a small detachment of Franks protecting him were captured and sent as prisoners to Alaric. Gregory states that the Arian Gundobad converted at this time to Catholicism in secret but this is questionable. We could speculate that if he did, he may have done so under the terms set by Clovis. Having learnt that exacting tribute was a profitable way forward Clovis marched into Aquitania threatening Alaric.

502-503. Meeting with Alaric on Loire.

On learning that Clovis had left Burgundy and was threatening a resumption of the war Alaric now called the meeting on the Loire, near Tours, sometime in 502/3 to negotiate terms of peace before Clovis turned on him again. Mathisen dates this to “just after 500”, Wolfram to 5027; Gregory in a similar vein doesn't give it a precise date8, but Bordeaux had returned to Visigothic possession by 5059. Both parties though got what they wanted; Clovis obtained Syagrius, if he had not been handed over before, tribute and his captured Franks. The Visigoths were probably given back territory taken by the Franks south of the Loire in the Aquitania provinces, such Poitiers, Bourges and Bordeaux. I would expect that Clovis retained the cities on the Loire in the provinces of the Lugdunensii. By 503 Clovis may also have had reports of the troubles brewing in the the Germanic provinces due to incursions of the and Alamanni and thought peace with the Visigoths was a wise move at this point. Next part seven.

Footnotes:

1 Mathisen, Ralph., The First Franco-Visigothic War and the Prelude to the Battle of Vouille, p.4

1a Translation by Daly - Clovis: How Barbaric, How Pagan? 1994 p.633

2 Collins, Roger.,Visigothic Spain 409 – 711, Wiley-Blackwell, 2008, p.33

3 See Mathisen, R.Ruricius of Limoges and Friends : A Collection of Letters from Visigothic Aquitania. Liverpool University Press, 1999 P.14, Volusianus wrote to Ruricius saying he was “stupefied with fear of the enemy”.

Gregory, Histories II.26, II.29. His successor Verus was also exiled in the build up to the battle of Vouille.

5 Ibid Mathisen The First Franco-Visigothic War and the Prelude to the Battle of Vouille , p.4

6 Ferreiro, Alberto, Editor. The Visigoths: Studies in Culture and Society, Mathisen, Sivan The kingdom of Toulouse, BRILL 2012, p.57

7 Ibid Mathisen and Shanzer P.6

8 Greg.Histories II.35 
9 Ibid Mathisen, The First Franco-Visigothic War and the Prelude to the Battle of Vouille, P.5

Wednesday, 24 June 2015

The Baptism of Clovis,

Clovis, Towards a New Chronology, Part Five.

   
By Dane R. Pestano ©2015. Hover cursor over reference numbers for reference text.

496. The Baptism of Clovis. 

The baptism of Clovis as a Catholic was one of the most important moments in the history of western Europe. The Franks were pressured on all sides by Arianism and had been contained by the Visigoths who had also supported their barbarian enemies over the Rhine, some of whom were nominally Arian Christian as well. The Byzantine empire though in the east had continued a policy of supporting the Franks since the time of Clovis' father Childeric making Clovis consequently a man of sufficient means to support an army to counter the Visigothic and Gothic threat. It was not in the interests of the eastern empire to have a western empire that was sufficiently strong enough to challenge them. Clovis had made closer ties with the Burgundians by marrying the niece of Gundobad, the Catholic Clotilda. Gundobad had no love for the Goths either having had his eye on Italy himself in the past when he had set up Glycerius as Emperor in 473, and having subsequently devastated Liguria in 490. Although Gundobad was himself Arian the Burgundian people were more likely a Catholic people, like Clotilda, her parents, her sister and the famous Avitus of Vienne were. He had also aligned and allied with the neighbouring Catholic Armoricans. In light of these political manoeuvrings Clovis' choice of Catholicism was the only sensible choice he could make. By doing so he would find acceptance for the Franks as Christian protectors in northern Gaul; he would align with the nominally Catholic Burgundians and Armoricans, and snub the Goths and their Arianism. He would also please the Eastern Empire by continuing anti Gothic policies. By having the support of the Church of Rome and the Pope in Italy, Clovis now had a back door influence there, in direct opposition to Theoderic in Ravenna. It was also to be a momentous choice for the future of Europe, as summarised by Lincoln, Baigent and Leigh:
“The pact between Clovis and the Roman church, in short, was one of momentous consequence to Christendom - not only the Christendom of the time, but also the Christendom of the next millennium. Clovis' baptism was deemed to mark the birth of a new Roman Empire – a Christian empire, based on the Roman church and administered, on a secular level, by the Merovingian bloodline. In other words an indissoluble bond was established between church and state, each pledging allegiance to the other, each binding itself to the other in perpetuity.” 1a
Indeed, but dating the baptism has been a matter of contention for some time with modern authors seeking to move the baptism to the early sixth century. It was fixed at 496 as Gregory had stated it took place after the battle of Tolbiac, which was, according to him or an interpolator, fifteen years after Clovis began to reign, basing the start of this reign in 481/2. However, as discussed in the introduction Van de Vyver and others soon realised that the battle of Tolbiac took place in around 506. So Clovis' conversion to Christianity could have happened then, (with this battle then conversion scenario) and his baptism was subsequently placed in 507/8,shortly after. However as discussed at the end of part four of this work, the conversion and baptism can be seperated from the Battle of Tolbiac.

Danuta Shanzer had, as early as 1998, proposed that the baptism be dated to 507 in her ground breaking work – Dating the Baptism of Clovis: the bishop of Vienne vs the bishop of Tours. Wood, in concert with Mathisen, in agreeing suggested that the baptism could have taken place as late as 507/8, when a date for the battle of Tolbiac is placed in 506. But the letter of Avitus and of Clovis and the profusion of evidence does not agree with this date. 
Shanzer also suggests a comment made by Theodoric the great shows or hints that he considered Clovis was still a pagan.1b This is the occasion when Theodoric was asking Boethius to find and send a harp to Clovis, probably in around 506. He used the words “facturus aliquid Orpheus, cum dulci sono gentilium fera corda domuerit,” which is commonly translated as, “he will be another Orpheus, taming the wild hearts of these foreigners [gentilium] with sweet music.”1c There is no hint of paganism here, in the non ecclesiastical context of the letter, the word means foreigners, which the Franks were to the Goths. If anything Theodoric is hinting that the Franks were not as yet fully Romanised and were still intent on war. In fact Gregory had got the date right in his scheme but had manufactured the event of his conversion to make Clovis appear as a new Constantine, converting and baptising after a tough battle. By the time the battle of Tolbiac took place in 506 Clovis had been a Catholic for ten years as we shall now see. 

Clovis, now around twenty-three years of age, decided to be baptised on Christmas Day 496, probably at Reims by Remigius, as suggested by Fredegar and then Hincmar1. He may have delayed this event since his marriage in 492 for a number of reasons. The first, as Gregory hints, is that he had lost his first son soon after baptism and he was worried that his fellow Franks would not support him if he accepted the faith at this time, but now after several victory's he was more secure of his command. The second reason was the problems of the Acacian schism that was affecting the church at the time. This had begun in 484 and was not solved until 519. When Clovis had possibly chosen Christianity in 492 the schism was tearing the church apart and these are probably part of the perverse doctrines that Avitus described in his letter to Clovis. When Pope Gelasius took power in 492 he tried to heal the schism and it is during his reign that Clovis decided to be baptised. As it was, he became a competens only days before Gelasius died in November 496. The third reason was the allure of Arianism which may still have been on his mind in the years before he was baptised.


But why now, what had changed, what prompted his choice of faith as Avitus puts it? Gregory may have given us a subtle negative clue. He tells us that Clovis' first son Ingomer was baptised a catholic but then soon died. Clovis, after this event, was in no hurry to profess his faith to Clotilda's Catholicism. However, over the next four years Clotilda had successfully given birth to Chlodomer around 494, Childebert in 495 and possibly Clothar by 496 who had all survived baptism and thrived. More than this the Catholic Clotilda had successfully given him three healthy sons! A daughter was to follow in the next couple of years. He had also in the interval expanded his kingdom and driven the Visigoths from the Loire. In his mind therefore, his conversion to Christianity in 492 had not brought him any bad luck and in fact his alliances with Catholics had brought him only good luck and an extended kingdom! We will proceed to the letter of Avitus to Clovis on his baptism shortly, which will confirm this chronology, but let us first read of how Gregory described the baptism :
He (Clovis) met with his followers, but before he could speak the power of God anticipated him, and all the people cried out together: "O pious king, we reject our mortal gods, and we are ready to follow the immortal God whom Remi preaches.” This was reported to the bishop, who was greatly rejoiced, and bade them get ready the baptismal font. The squares were shaded with tapestried canopies, the churches adorned with white curtains, the baptistery set in order, the aroma of incense spread, candles of fragrant odour burned brightly, and the whole shrine of the baptistery was filled with a divine fragrance: and the Lord gave such grace to those who stood by that they thought they were placed amid the odours of paradise. And the king was the first to ask to be baptised by the bishop. Another Constantine advanced to the baptismal font, to terminate the disease of ancient leprosy and wash away with fresh water the foul spots that had long been borne. And when he entered to be baptised, the saint of God began with ready speech: "Gently bend your neck, Sigamber; worship what you burned; burn what you worshipped...And so the king confessed all-powerful God in the Trinity, and was baptised in the name of the Father, Son and holy Spirit, and was anointed with the holy ointment with the sign of the cross of Christ. And of his army more than 3000 were baptised. His sister also, Albofled, was baptised, who not long after passed to the Lord ”
Avitus, the Burgundian bishop of Vienne had written to Clovis in 497 to congratulate him on his recent baptism. The dating of this letter has been much debated and the strange references to the Greek Emperor and a chosen leader have puzzled historians, mainly because without the correct reading of the letter they were placing his baptism in the early sixth century as late as 508, instead of where it belongs in the late fifth century. Wood in concert with Mathisen suggested that the baptism could have taken place as late as 508, when a date for the battle of Tolbiac is placed in 506. But the letter and the profusion of evidence does not agree with this date as we shall find. Shanzer makes the comment that the baptism took place late in Clovis' life, just three years before he died. We should therefore now examine the letter of Avitus to prove the baptism was over ten years earlier in 496. Here is the letter in full :
Bishop Avitus to King Clovis

      The followers of error have in vain, by a cloud of contradictory and untrue opinions, sought to conceal from your extreme subtlety the glory of the Christian name. While we committed these questions to eternity and trusted that the truth of each man's belief would appear at the Future Judgement, the ray of truth had shone forth even among present shadows. Divine Providence has found the arbiter of our age. Your choice is a general sentence. Your Faith is our victory. Many others, in this matter, when their bishops or friends exhort them to adhere to the True Faith, are accustomed to oppose traditions of their race and respect for their ancestral cult; thus they culpably prefer a false shame to their salvation. While they observe futile reverence for their parents (by continuing to share their unbelief) , they confess that they do not know what they should choose to do. After this marvellous deed, guilty shame can no longer shelter behind this excuse.
     Of all your ancient genealogy you have chosen to keep only your own nobility, and you have willed that your race should derive from you all the glories which adorn high birth. Your ancestors have prepared a great destiny for you; you willed to prepare better things (for those who will follow you). You follow your ancestors in reigning in this world; you have opened the way to your descendants to a heavenly realm.
     Let Greece indeed rejoice that she has chosen our Princeps, that she is no longer one who alone deserves the gift of so great an office. Your sphere burns with its own brilliance, and in the person of a king , the light of a rising sun shines over the western lands. It is right that this light began at the Nativity of our Redeemer, so that the waters of rebirth have brought you forth to salvation the very day the world received the the birth of its redemption, the Lord of Heaven. The day celebrated as the Lord's nativity is also yours, in which you have consecrated your soul to God, your life to your contemporaries, your glory to posterity.
     What should be said of the glorious solemnity of your regeneration? If I could not assist in person among the minsters (of the rite) I shared in it's joy. Thanks to God, our land took part in the thanksgiving, for, before your baptism, a messenger of Your Most Subtle Humility informed us that you were “competens” (that is, to be baptised within forty days). Therefore the sacred night (of Christmas) found us sure of what you would do. We saw (with the eyes of the spirit) that great site, when a crowd of bishops around you, in the ardour of their holy ministry, poured over your Royal limbs the water of life; when that head, feared by the masses, bowed down before the servants of God; when your royal locks, hidden under a helmet, were steeped in holy oil; when your breast relieved of it's cuirass, shone with the same whiteness as your baptismal robes. Do not doubt most flourishing of kings, that this soft clothing will give more force to your arms; whatever Fortune has given up to now, this sanctity will bestow.
     I would wish to add some exhortations to your praises if anything escaped either your knowledge or your attention. Should we preach the faith to the convert who perceived it without a preacher; or humility, which you have long shown towards us (Bishops), although you only owe it to us now, after your profession of faith; or mercy attested, in tears and joy to God and men, by a people once captive, now freed by you?
     One wish remains for me to express. Since God, thanks to you, will make your people His own possession, offer a part of the treasure of faith which fills your heart to the peoples living beyond you, who, still living in natural ignorance, have not been corrupted by the seed of perverse doctrine. Do not fear to send them envoys and to plead with them the cause of God, who has done so much for your cause. So that the other pagan peoples at first being subject to your kingdom for the sake of religion, while they still seem to have another ruler, may be distinguished rather by their race than by their prince. [end of letter missing.]
The first comment Avitus makes is that Clovis has averted the choice of a perverse doctrine. This could be Arianism and the argument against Catholicism at the time could have been the troubles due to the Acacian schism causing divisions within the Catholic church. Clovis though had made the right choice in the eyes of Avitus. This adulation of Clovis by a Burgundian Bishop would make no sense after 500CE when Clovis had invaded Burgundy to help Godigisel take on Gundobad and brought the Burgundians to submission and tribute. But in 496, with the Franks and Burgundians on good terms and Clovis married to a Burgundian Catholic princess, all was well between the two nations and this correspondence shows it. 
 
The next major statement Avitus makes is that which will ultimately date the letter and which has caused so much confusion. Due to it's importance it requires a close study and for that we must turn to Shanzer, whose important work provides us with all the answers. Only the final solution eluded her, which I will produce here. The traditional reading of this came from Hilgarth, writing in 19692:
Gaudeat equidem Graecia principem legisse nostrum, sed non iam quae tanti muneris donum sola mereatur
“Let Greece indeed rejoice that she has elected an emperor who shares our faith; it is no longer alone in deserving such a favour”
Shanzer had already compiled a close study of the Latin and the manuscript variants and states that this reading is from the oldest manuscript 'L'. She dismissed the word elected as a viable translation of legisse but suggested that it should rather be translated as chosen. So she translates the first part of the sentence as “As far as I am concerned let Greece rejoice in having chosen our ruler”. However having come to a nearly correct reading she fails to understand the context of the message. She poses the question “who is the Princeps?” After discussing some alternatives suggested by other historians, such as it referring to Anastasius or even Clovis, she cannot come to a conclusion as to who could be meant. With no conclusion she must dismiss the idea that this person was chosen:
L's text principem legisse nostrum simply does not mean much in itself. It is insufficiently transparent. Chosen our ruler for what? The purpose of choosing, or else the object of choice, must be deducible from the context or explicitly stated. It is not.”
It is perfectly deducible as I will soon show. As she was unable to explain the context of the sentence she dismissed it entirely, but before she did she thankfully also explained the feminine case involved in the reading, translating the second part as “..but she is no longer the one to deserve so great a gift alone”. Not coming to a viable context she then dismissed the 'L' reading and suggested we use a much later variant of the text by Sirmond, the 'S' manuscript from 1647CE:
“Gaudeat ergo quidem Graecia habere se principem legis nostrae, sed non iam tanti muneris dono sola mereatur illustrari” which she translates as :
“Therefore let Greece be sure to rejoice, that she has a ruler who is orthodox, but she is no longer the only one to bask in the illumination of such a great gift.”
Unfortunately Shanzers translation of Sirmonds corrupted reading does little to enhance our understanding of the context. The emperor Anastasius was far from Orthodox. He had Miaphysite tendencies and there was an Acacian schism between the churches of east and west during his time. He was not well regarded in the west because of this and so the choice of this emperor has fallen by the wayside. In fact all it shows is that Sirmond was as confused about the meaning of the original reading as all historians have been.

Shanzer's examination of the 'L' manuscript has shown that nostrum means ours / belonging to us, i.e. someone who Avitus, a Burgundian, considers a western leader on equal terms to Anastasius in the East. She says nostrum must be separated from Graecia3 and indeed this is the correct reading of the Latin. So, if we actually look at the original reading again we can see how it should have been translated, as I have used in the above translation of the letter , i.e.:
“Let Greece indeed rejoice that she has chosen our Princeps, that she is no longer one who alone deserves the gift of so great an office”
The keys here are the words principem and muneris The meaning of muneris is commonly office4, the less used meaning favour making no sense in the context. Shanzer seems to overlook the word completely. Principem therefore refers to a leader, chosen by Anastasius in the East, that Avitus would consider a leader in the west on nearly equal terms with Anastasius. This can only be Theoderic the Great himself.5 Theoderic had grown up in Constantinople as a hostage and had become thoroughly Romanised by the time he was eighteen. He commanded his Goths in the service of the Eastern Empire becoming Magister Militum and then Consul by 483. The emperor Zeno sent Theoderic in 488 to overthrow the Patrician Odoacer, who had become king of Italy, but was now disrespecting the Eastern Empire and causing conflict. Theoderic eventually killed Odoacer with his bare hands and took control of Italy in 493. By this time Zeno had died in 491 and in his place Anastasius ruled as Eastern Emperor. Theoderic was then in 497 sent the imperial regalia by Anastasius who formally recognised him as Princeps of the Western Roman Empire based in Italy.6

Anastasius though considered him as merely a viceroy and Theoderic appears to have honoured this position in the early years, becoming more independent as the years progressed, so much so that by 507 Anastasius had sent a fleet of 200 ships to Italy to distract Theoderic whilst Clovis and Gundobad defeated the Visigoths. Anastasius needed a counterbalance to the increasing power and influence of Theoderic. That man was Clovis. The date of being chosen then by Anastasius is 497, it cannot be when he first entered Italy in 488 as he was then merely sent by Zeno. The west was overjoyed, as Avitus exclaims, it had it's own leader again, at last, after a period of four years when Anastasius ruled alone. Anastasius was no longer alone, the West had a man in an office equal to that of Anastasius. Avitus was writing therefore in around 497 and so Clovis' baptism was in December 496. The old chronology had got this one right.

Avitus then speaks about the timing of Clovis' baptism, which was on Christmas day 496. He next mentions the humility that Clovis has long shown to us Bishopswhich must once again show that Clovis had been Christian for some years. He continues this same exhortation by mentioning “a people once captive, now freed by you”. Who were the much debated populus captivus? Shanzer helps us by defining the phrase. It means a Christian people, perhaps recently conquered, but not the Allamani of course who were pagan7. She rejects Reverdy's idea that it could have been the Frankish people, which has some merit, many of whom had baptised with Clovis, as they were previously pagan. She then returns to the idea that they were actual captives and suggest they were prisoners of the Visigothic war in 507-508 as this is where she wants to place the baptism. However, she does mention that they could be a Catholic people who were religiously captive, as they would be under Arian Visigothic control. She admits the possibility of this being very good, but then dismisses this obvious solution8. The captive people were the Catholic populations of the provinces of the Tractus Armoricanus who had been under Visigothic control, that Clovis had recently freed. Bishops such as Volusanius of Tours were persecuted by Alaric's Arian government and he was taken captive and died in exile in Toulouse or Spain9.

About fifty years after Clovis died Bishop Nicetius of Trier wrote to Clotsinda, granddaughter of Clovis trying to get her to convert her husband, the Lombard King Alboin to Catholicism. In this letter he mentions how Clovis had prostrated himself before the tomb of St Martin, was then baptised and then mentioned his subsequent exploits against Gundobad and Alaric:
“...You have frequently heard how your grandmother Clotilda, of blessed memory, came to the kingdom of the Franks and how she brought King Clovis to the Catholic Faith. As he was a man of good understanding, he declined to accede to her wishes until he had fully grasped the truth of our doctrines. Once convinced, he prostrated himself before the tomb of St Martin, and promised to receive baptism without delay. You have been told of his subsequent exploits against the heretics Alaric and Gondebald ; you cannot have forgotten the noble gifts that fell even in this world to the lot, both of him and of his sons...”
Therefore the Bishop of Trier placed the baptism before the Burgundian civil war. But when exactly? Tours was back in Visigothic hands by 49710, so this must have occurred shortly before in 496. Another indicator in this letter is that Clovis had taken some time before acceding to the wishes of Clotilda to be Baptised, and had chosen the truth of 'our doctrines', i.e. Catholicism rather than Arianism.

One small puzzle in all of this is that Burgundian Sigismund, son of Gundobad is said by historians to have converted from Arianism to Catholicism sometime around 502-50611. The reason for suspecting this is that Avitus had written to Pope Hormisdas following the accession of Sigismund in 516. Shanzer states that Sigismund “had made a further visit to Rome in the time of Pope Symmachus, more importantly, the Bishop of Vienne apparently places Sigismund's conversion from Arianism to Catholicism in the context of this second visit”, Symmachus was pope from 498 to 514, so we are talking of events during this time. Shanzer continues, “In addition, he seems to indicate that it took place before the conversion of Clovis”. Shanzer then explains the evidence from the letter, so that according to Avitus, Sigismund was the only one of the kings who was not ashamed to convert”. As some historians thought Clovis's baptism did not occur in 496 but perhaps in 503 or later, Sigismund's conversion was placed earlier than this. What Avitus meant of course, was that Sigismund was the only one of the Arian kings to convert from Arianism to Catholicism, not that he had converted before Clovis. In effect, Clovis had never been an Arian Catechumen. 

There is no need therefore to try and squeeze Sigismunds conversion to Catholicism as early as 502, which was unlikely anyway whilst his father still lived. It couldn't have been early in the sixth century because there was civil disturbance in Rome between rival factions to the Pope from 502, the Laurentian schism, where there were two Popes, which did not end until 506. Following this was the Visigothic war in 507-508 and then Theoderic's invasion of Provence and Burgundy in 509-510. If Sigismund did convert as a result of his second visit to Rome in the time of Symmachus it was probably around 513-14, as he founded his first monastery at Agaune in 51512. Michael Moore, agreeing with Wood suggests that Sigismund came to the throne soon after his conversion13.

The last point is one that has been noted many times before. Avitus in his letter to Clovis does not mention the honorary consulate awarded to Clovis by the Emperor Anastasius. For Woods, Mathisen and Shanzer this is problematical, as it would have taken place the very year of his baptism in their revised dating of 508, so we should expect Avitus to mention it, if only in passing, but he doesn't. The reason then is clear why he didn't; it wasn't to happen until another eleven years had passed.

Clovis' baptism was unfortunately overshadowed in the annalistic record by two events; the death and selection of a new Pope in 496 and the elevation of Theoderic to imperial status in 497. Next part six.

Footnotes:

1 Lynch, Joseph H. Christianizing Kinship: Ritual Sponsorship in Anglo-Saxon England,Cornell University Press, 1998, p.39

1a Lincoln, H, Baigent, M, Leigh, R. The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, Arrow; New edition, 2006, p.265 

1b Shanzer, Danuta, Vouille 507: Historiographical, Hagiographical, and Diplomatic Reconsiderations and Fortuna ,- The Battle of Vouillé, 507 CE Where France Began p.68, 2012.

1c See O'Donnell, James J. Cassiodorus, chp.3, University of California Press, 1979.

2 Ibid Shanzer 1998, p.37, fn.59.

3 Ibid Shanzer 1998, p.40, “In that case, whatever nostrum means is clearly opposed to what Greacia means” Greece of course represents the Byzantine Empire.

4 From the Perseus Latin word study tool : `a service, office, post, employment, function, duty'

5 Principem Nostrum could also be a referral to the Pope. It had been used in this context as early as the fifth century. The new Pope in 496 was named Anastasius, the same as the Emperor. However the Emperor in the East did not choose this Pope.

6 See Arnold, J., Theoderic and the Roman Imperial Restoration Cambridge University Press, 2014.

7 Shanzer :”These people cannot be the recently conquered Allamani” ibid Shanzer 1998, p.44

8 Shanzer writes : “while I would agree that the idea is problematic, if one takes it literally, it is perfectly possible, if understood figuratively.” Ibid Shanzer 1998, P.45

9 Greg. Histories II.26

10 As Volusanius had been deposed and sent to Toulouse in 497.

11 Favrod and Shanzer as examples, Shanzer, Avitus of Vienne, p.18

12 Dunn, Maralyn., Belief and Religion in Barbarian Europe c. 350-700, Continuum Publishing, 2013, P.61

13 Moore, Michael E., A Sacred Kingdom: Bishops and the Rise of Frankish Kingship, 300-850, The  Catholic University of America Press, 2011, p.142