Imagining The Saxons In Late Antique Gaul

1. Neue Studien zur Sachsenforschung 10
Sächsische Leute und Länder
Benennung und Lokalisierung von
Gruppenidentitäten im ersten Jahrtausend

2. Sächsische Leute und Länder
Benennung und Lokalisierung von Gruppenidentitäten
im ersten Jahrtausend

3. Neue Studien zur Sachsenforschung
Band 10
herausgegeben vom
Braunschweigischen Landesmuseum
in Verbindung mit dem
Internationalen Sachsensymposion
durch
Babette Ludowici

4. Sächsische Leute und Länder
Benennung und Lokalisierung von Gruppenidentitäten
im ersten Jahrtausend
herausgegeben von
Melanie Augstein und Matthias Hardt

5. Gedruckt mit Unterstützung des Leibniz-Instituts für
Geschichte und Kultur des östlichen Europa e. V. in Leipzig.
&KGUG/C»PCJOGYKTFOKVʏPCPKGTVFWTEJ5VGWGTOKVVGNCWH
der Grundlage des vom Sächsischen Landtag beschlossenen
Haushaltes.
Alle Beiträge wurden einem Verfahren zur Qualitätssicherung
(peer review) unterzogen.
Umschlaggestaltung: Karl-Heinz Perschall
Satz und Layout: Matthias Halle
Redaktion: Melanie Augstein und Matthias Hardt (Korrektorat
der englischen Texte durch Madeleine Hummler und Daniela
Hofmann)
$KDNKQITCʏUEJG+PHQTOCVKQP
der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek:
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation
KPFGTGWVUEJGP0CVKQPCNDKDNKQITCʏG
FGVCKNNKGTVGDKDNKQITCʏUEJGCVGPUKPFKO+PVGTPGVØDGT
http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.
© 2019 Braunschweigisches Landesmuseum
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Verlag Uwe Krebs, 38176 Wendeburg
Abbildungsnachweise
liegen in der Verantwortung der Autoren
Druck: oeding print GmbH, Braunschweig
ISBN 978-3-932030-84-0

6. 5
Im Jahr 2015 wurde in Leipzig der Ersterwähnung des Ortes
zum Jahr 1015 durch den Bischof und Chronisten Thietmar
von Merseburg gedacht. Das Stadtjubiläum ist mit einer
breiten Palette von Veranstaltungen begangen worden,
unter anderem mit einer Ausstellung im stadtgeschichtlichen
Museum unter dem Titel »1015. Leipzig von Anfang an«.
Das Geisteswissenschaftliche Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur
Ostmitteleuropas an der Universität Leipzig (jetzt Leibniz-
Institut für Geschichte und Kultur des östlichen Europa) hielt
dieses Jubiläum für angemessen, die »Arbeitsgemeinschaft
zur Archäologie der Sachsen und ihrer Nachbarvölker in
Nordwesteuropa« in die Stadt einzuladen und ihr damit zum
ersten Mal in demjenigen Land Gelegenheit zur Zusammen-
kunft und zur Diskussion zu geben, das in der Gegenwart als
einziges unter vielen anderen den Namen der Sachsen ohne
differenzierenden Zusatz trägt.
Es lag nahe, bei dieser besonderen Gelegenheit über
»Sächsische Leute und Länder« und die »Benennung und
Lokalisierung von Gruppenidentitäten im ersten Jahrtausend«
nachzudenken. In enger Kooperation mit dem Lehrstuhl für Ur-
und Frühgeschichte am Historischen Seminar der Universität
Leipzig wurde unter dieser Themenstellung vom 12. bis zum
16. September 2015 das 66. Internationale Sachsensymposion
in den Räumen des GWZO und der Universität ausgerichtet.
89 Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler aus Belgien,
Dänemark, Deutschland, England, Frankreich, den Nieder-
landen,ausNorwegen,Österreich,Polen,Russland,Schweden,
aus der Schweiz, aus Wales und aus den USA nahmen daran
teil und tauschten sich über Sachsen und ihre Namen, ihre
Regionen und Identitäten ebenso wie diejenigen anderer
Gentes, Gruppen und Einzelpersonen zwischen Römischer
KaiserzeitundhohemMittelaltersowieüberaktuelleFundeund
Forschungen aus. Ziele der Exkursion waren das Museum für
Ur- und Frühgeschichte des Archäologischen Landesmuseums
Thüringen in Weimar und der Merseburger Dom mit dem
zugehörigen Museum im Rahmen der Vereinigten Domstifter
zu Merseburg, Naumburg und des Kollegiatsstifts Zeitz.
Die im Rahmen dieses Bandes versammelten 21 inter-
disziplinären archäologischen, historischen und sprachwis-
senschaftlichen Beiträge sind das Ergebnis des Leipziger
Sachsensymposions. Ihre Veröffentlichung wäre nicht gelungen
QJPGFKGʏPCPKGNNG7PVGTUVØVWPIFGU)91KGURTCEJNKEJG
Überarbeitung der englischsprachigen Texte haben Madeleine
Hummler (York) und Daniela Hofmann (Bergen) vorgenommen,
Layout und Satz übernahm Matthias Halle (Leipzig).
Melanie Augstein
Lehrstuhl für Ur- und Frühgeschichte am Heinrich Schliemann-Institut für
Altertumswissenschaften der Universität Rostock
Matthias Hardt
Leibniz-Institut für Geschichte und Kultur des östlichen Europa in Leipzig
Babette Ludowici
Braunschweigisches Landesmuseum
Arbeitsbereich Sachsenforschung
Claus von Carnap-Bornheim
Stiftung Schleswig-Holsteinische Landesmuseen
Vorsitzender des Internationalen Sachsensymposions
Vorwort

7. 6
Inhalt
Matthias Hardt und Melanie Augstein
Sächsische Leute und Länder – Eine Einführung 9
I. Identitäten und Imaginationen
Walter Pohl
Sächsische Identitäten und die Bedeutung der Ethnizität im frühmittelalterlichen Europa 23
Christian Zschieschang
(Die) Sachsen – Ein Terminus im Spannungsfeld dreier anderer: Denotat, Identität und Raumordnung 33
James M. Harland
Imagining the Saxons in Late Antique Gaul 45
Barbara Yorke
Saxon Identity in Southern England 57
Ludwig Rübekeil
Singularität in jütischen Ethnika 65
II. Symbole und Verkörperungen
Lone Claudi-Hansen and Morten Axboe
Gudum on Zealand – A New ›Gudme‹ Emerging? 79
Bente Magnus
Strange Creatures – S-shaped Brooches from the Migration Period in Norway 95
6QTWPCEJTKUUQPCPF/CLC-TGYKĠUMC
The ›Lynx Ladies‹ – Burials Furnished with Lynx Skins from the Migration and Merovingian Periods
found in Present-day Sweden 103
Ulrich Lehmann
In Search of the Snake – The Hidden Symbolism of Early Medieval Sword Blades 121
Michael Neiß
Ein weibliches Herrschaftszeichen? Überlegungen zur wikingerzeitlichen Elec-Spange 133
III. Räume und Routen
Pernille Kruse
Show me your House – And I will tell you who you are? 147

8. 7
Nancy L. Wicker
Thuringian Links to Jutland and Western Norway as Reflected in Scandinavian-type Migration Period
Bracteates – A Family Affair? 155
Karen Høilund Nielsen
The Cemetery at Viumgård in North-Western Jutland and the Chronology of the Sixth Century 167
Ingo Eichfeld und Daniel Nösler
Bauern, Händler, Seefahrer: Ein neu entdeckter Handelsplatz des 1. Jahrtausends n. Chr. an der südlichen Niederelbe 183
Mirko Oehlert
Stein oder nicht Stein. Die »urbs Libzi« im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert 201
Joanna Wojnicz
Der Hortfund von Cortnitz in der Oberlausitz 211
IV. Kontinuitäten und Transformationen
Bertil Helgesson
Vång, Blekinge, Sweden – A Place of Eternity 219
Melanie Augstein and Hans-Jörg Karlsen
Nienbüttel – New Research on Old Graves 227
Christoph G. Schmidt
Totengedenken und Identität: Beobachtungen am jüngerkaiserzeitlichen Fundplatz Frienstedt in Thüringen 237
Sven Jäger
Gekommen – Geblieben – Gewandelt: Beziehungen des spätkaiserzeitlich-germanischen Fundmaterials
aus dem nordwestlichen Baden-Württemberg und deren Bewertung 249

9. 8
Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer des 66. Internationalen Sachsensymposions vor dem Leipziger Opernhaus am Augustusplatz (Foto: Kristin Opitz).

10. 45
The other contributions to this part of the volume illustrate the
OWNVKHCEGVGFTQNGUVJCV5CZQPUJCXGRNC[GFKPGXGPVUQHVJGʏTUV
millennium AD. The involvement of the diverse peoples known
to the later Roman Empire by that name in the transformation
QH 4QOCP $TKVCKP KU YGNN MPQYP CPF UVKNN ʏGTEGN[ FGDCVGF
(Yorke, this volume; for a recent statement, see *ƖơƨƖơơ 2013).
The literary representation of Saxons in other dioceses of the
Western Roman Empire during its fourth- to sixth-century
transformation is not extensively studied (but see (ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ
2014; (ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017). This silence is understandable. Saxons
rarely feature in texts of the period and the contexts for their
appearances are often unreliable ($ƖƧƩƝƤơƤƢƚƬ 1984). Our
authors only provide enough detail to allow for a range of
interpretations (contrast, for example, $ƖƧƩƝƤơƤƢƚƬ 1984
with *ƚƖƩƝƚƧ 1999). Where mention of saxones is certain,
we are faced with a Classical ethnographic framework that
does not necessarily permit the representation of the realities
QH HQWTVJ CPF ʏHVJEGPVWT[ 5CZQP UQEKGV[ UGG *ƖơƨƖơơ
2007a, 45–57). Even in those instances where the written
documentation is relatively detailed, such as with late antique
descriptions of the end of Roman Britain and the aduentus
saxonum (Gildas, De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, DEB
hereafter), considerable epistemological and empirical barriers
impede the scholar who would seek to use written sources in
conjunction with archaeological material (*ƖơƨƖơơ 2011). It is
FKHʏEWNVCPF+JCXGRTGXKQWUN[CTIWGFPKIJQPKORQUUKDNGVQ
use such sources to construct an authentic depiction of late
antique Saxon society (*ƖƧơƖƣƙ 2017a *ƖƧơƖƣƙ 2017b).
Attempts to do so rely on approaches to ethnic identity that
have been dismantled by modern sociology ($ƧƪƗƖƠƚƧ 2004).
This article therefore takes a different approach to the
study of Saxon identity. It does not seek the ›true‹ Saxons
behind these written accounts. Instead it aims to unravel the
purposes of their depiction, and how these were pursued in
the Late Roman diocese of Gaul between texts from the mid-
ʏHVJCPFNCVGUKZVJEGPVWTKGU+QHHGTECUGUVWFKGUHQTJQYVJG
Saxons were depicted by two authors of similar background:
Sidonius Apollinaris and Gregory of Tours. Although both
were Gallic bishops of senatorial descent, the vast changes
that occurred across this period produced authors with very
different outlooks.
In this article I examine the two authors’ personal under-
standings of Saxons and how these were deployed in their
texts. A shift in mentalité is found which demonstrates the
effect of Christian thinking on the ›middling classes‹ in the
Late Roman West, causing shockwaves that would reverberate
throughout and which may be seen as one of the many factors
in the Empire’s end ($ƧƤƬƣ 2012). A crisis in patronage
management from the fourth century onwards produced
EQPʐKEVDGVYGGPVJGprincipales and the lower aristocracy in
town curiae. As excluded curiales turned to new patrons – ›the
Barbarians‹ – the Empire ceased to exist ($ƧƤƬƣ 2012, 491).
#UKUYGNNMPQYPVJG%JWTEJʏNNGFOWEJQHVJGXQKFNGHVD[VJG
retraction of imperial governance. One reason for the change
in the status of the Church across this period was its being
a rare symbol of ideological continuity ($ƧƤƬƣ 2012, 482),
but this beacon of continuity was not external to the societal
shift underway. The Gallic Church was by no means a cohesive,
WPKʏGFGPVKV[CPFVJGDKUJQRoURQUKVKQPYCUPQVVJCVQHVJG
secularlandowner.Ithadtobecontinuallyfoughtfor,unlikethe
relative security of the Late Roman landed aristocrat ($ƧƤƬƣ
2012, 496). As a result, as imperial authority degraded, mental
outlooks became dispersed; a homogenising metropolitan
centre shattered into a landscape of numerous vantage points,
varying regionally and conceptually (ƞƚƛƚƣƗƖƘƝ 2013). Yet
many social structures which had organized people’s lives
remained the same ()ƞơơƚƩƩ 2003, 27–29). What had changed
were the conceptual frameworks within which these were
regarded, after the removal of the conceptual centre, what
4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ (2015, 15) calls a victory of ›local Romanness‹.
We start with the imperial perspective, at its most extreme
due to crisis, in the work of Sidonius Apollinaris. This entailed
the Roman Empire being the cultural centre with the Barbarians
DGKPIRGTKRJGTCN6JGETKUGUQHVJGGCTN[ʏHVJEGPVWT[JQYGXGT
caused Rome’s ideological centrality to decline. Eventually, the
only stabilizing centre to survive would be the Church. We
YKNN ʏPF KP )TGIQT[ QH 6QWTU C RGTURGEVKXG NCTIGN[ UJCRGF
subconsciously, by Rome’s successor in Gaul – the Merovingian
kingdom. Consciously, however, Gregory treated his own
KOOGFKCVGEKTENGQHCHHCKTUCUJKUFGʏPKPIEGPVTGYJKEJJGNF
UKIPKʏECPEGHQTJKOQPN[DGECWUGKVTGXGCNGFGUEJCVQNQIKECN
truth.ThisunveilssomenuancesinethnicperceptioninGregory
of Tours’ work which have until recently been overlooked.
Sidonius on the Saxons
Sidonius Apollinaris’ (c. AD 430–489) invaluable insight on
the Empire’s transformation in Gaul has long been recognized
(5Ʃƚƫƚƣƨ 1933; *ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 1994). His poetic and epistolary works
Imagining the Saxons in Late Antique Gaul
James M. Harland

11. 46
FGRKEV5CZQPUQPVJTGGQEECUKQPU6JGUGʐGGVKPITGHGTGPEGU
appear in texts that engage with varied, confusing political
circumstances, the result of the massive political upheavals
that took place during the erstwhile Prefect of Rome, then
Bishop of Clermont’s life.
Despite this, a constant of his work, where the Saxons
are concerned, is concern with the Goths in Aquitaine. The
ʏTUVTGHGTGPEGVQ5CZQPUKUCRCPGI[TKE5KFQPKWUFGNKXGTGFKP
Rome upon the accession to the consulship of his father-in-
law Eparchius Avitus (AD 456), whose imperial claim was
supported by Theodoric II (Sidonius Apollinaris, Carm. 7). The
second is a letter, sent perhaps around AD 470, from Sidonius
VQQPG0COCVKWUCPCXCNQHʏEGTKP'WTKEoUʐGGVKPVJG$C[QH
Biscay (Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.6). The third is a small
panegyrical poem in a letter from Sidonius to Lampridius, a
teacher of rhetoric at Bordeaux who found favour in Euric’s
court, which was sent in c. AD 478 as Sidonius awaited
freedom in Bordeaux following his capture at the Siege of
Clermont (Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.9). Sidonius is far
from exclusively concerned with the Goths in Aquitaine,
so the presence of Saxons in these particular works is not
coincidental. Their use by Sidonius, I will show, was conscious,
deliberate, and controlled.
The political purposes of Sidonius’ panegyric to Avitus
are well known. Beyond its main objective – praising the
new emperor – the panegyric addresses concerns such as the
establishment of Avitus on par with or above the recently-
deceased general Flavius Aëtius, and the defence of Avitus’
alliance with the Goths of Toulouse before a hostile Italian
court (5ƞƫƖƣ 1989, 87–91; *ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 1994, 67–70). Some treat
Theodoric II’s support of Avitus’ seizure of power as marking
›an important stage in the involvement of Germanic peoples
in internal Roman affairs‹ (*ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 1994, 54). Yet to see the
political involvement of the Goths of Toulouse in Avitus’ rise to
power as a chapter in a grand narrative of ›Germanic‹ conquest
of the Roman Empire blinds us to the subtleties of these events
and literary responses to them. Treating these concerns as
questions of Sidonius’ allegiance to a putatively coherent entity
(›the Goths‹) is overly simplistic. Sidonius’ allegiance to Rome
was to an abstract ideal, not to particular late antique rulers or
factions (*ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 1992). The position of Sidonius’ grandfather
as praetorian prefect for the usurper Constantine ›III‹ and
Sidonius’ possible involvement in a revolt against the Emperor
Majorian (4ƤƪƨƨƚƖƪ 2000) are here instructive; the tradition of
loyalty to ›Rome‹, formative in Sidonius’ upbringing, did not
demand loyalty to the regime in Ravenna.
Sidonius’letterswerecarefullyeditedpre-publication;there
is no reason not to believe that they received similar treatment
before their dispatch, especially to certain recipients. All letters
referring to Saxons address recipients in Euric’s service, and
were written after the siege of Clermont. It seems likely that
the contents were shaped with prying Gothic eyes in mind.
Sidonius’ letter to Namatius is a rare example, thus often
cited,ofalengthydescriptionofSaxons.Itisfrequentlymisread.
Most previous work indiscriminately takes the passage out
of its immediate context to shed light on the Anglo-Saxons’
purported Germanic ancestors (e.g. (ơƚƢƞƣƜ 2010, 40). The
description reads:
x,QMKPI CUKFG FQ NGV OG MPQY ʏPCNN[ UQOGVJKPI
concerning yourself and your household. But behold, while I
YCUKPVGPFKPIVQʏPKUJCNGVVGTYJKEJRTCVVNGFHQTVJGFWTCVKQP
a sudden messenger from Saintonges! With him I prolonged
some hours in discussion to learn of you, and he assuredly
FGENCTGF[QWVQJCXGUQWPFGFVJGENCTKQPVQVJGʐGGVCPFKP
the duty now of a sailor, now of a soldier, to be wandering
the twisting shores of the ocean against the curved galleys of
the Saxons, of whom however many rowers you see, you may
reckon as many to be an arch-pirate: thus all simultaneously
command and obey, teach and learn to engage in piracy. Of the
many reasons that might give you cause for caution, this is the
ITGCVGUVQHYJKEJ[QWOWUVDGYCTG6JKUGPGO[KUVJGʏGTEGUV
of all foes. He approaches unforeseen and, when foreseen,
slips away. He despises obstacles, and scatters the incautious.
+HJGRWTUWGUJGKPVGTEGRVUKHJGʐGGUJGGUECRGU5JKRYTGEMU
train him, not terrify him. His is not a mere acquaintanceship
with the crises of the sea, but intimacy. A storm makes those
who are to be attacked unguarded; it prohibits his attack from
being seen. He gladly risks rough rocks and seas in hope of
making a surprise attack.
Moreover, before they open up their sails from the
mainland toward their native country, that they might raise
their biting anchor from an enemy channel, a custom of those
returning is to kill a tenth of the captives through an equal
and torturous punishment, more sorrowful on account of its
being superstitious, and to disperse the inequity of death
over this collected crowd of the doomed via the equity of
lots. With such great vows are they bound that they must be
CDUQNXGFD[XKEVKOUVJWUPQVUQOWEJRWTIGFYKVJUCETKʏEGCU
polluted with sacrilege, the perpetrators of this slaughter think
it religious to extract torment from their captive rather than
ransom‹ (Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.6.13–15; translation
author’s own).
Let us read this in context. Exceptis iocis, ›joking apart‹,
opens the passage: to which joke does Sidonius refer?
Immediately before, Sidonius asks about Namatius’ life,
ECNNKPI JKO CP xCITKEWNVWTCNKUV QT CP CTEJKVGEV QH VJG ʏTUV
rank‹, then argues for Namatius’ poor skill as a hunter, due
to his useless, ›most merciful‹ hunting dogs, and observes
that his prey ›will rarely be overcome with you in pursuit‹
(Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.6.12). Clearly the joking is not
over: we see a dichotomy of the successful and unsuccessful
hunter. We may read an emphasis on the Saxons’ actions
compared to Namatius: what might be rendered in English
as ›if he pursues, he intercepts; if heʐGGUJGGUECRGUk Si
sequandur, intercipit; si fugiat, evadit; Sidonius Apollinaris,
Epist. +HYGTGCFVJKUCUJWOQTQWUYGʏPFPQVJKPI
more than an outlet for Sidonius’ concern for his friend. Not
reliable ethnographic description. Namatius’ Saxons existed,
but Sidonius’ observations on them need not be taken as fact.
0COCVKWUCHVGTCNNYCUVJGQPGʏIJVKPIVJGOJGMPGYYJCV

12. 47
the Saxons were like. What could Sidonius tell him? I disagree
with (ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ (2014, 63–65; 2017, 46-48), who suggests
that Sidonius shared accurate information with Namatius. The
claim is derived from -ƖƪƛƢƖƣƣ (1995, 168), who argues this
on precisely the same grounds from which I have argued the
opposite: that it seems odd for Sidonius to have shared such
information with a military commander setting out against the
Saxons. But reading this part of the letter as a joke allows
us to set this in a clearer context: as part of a wider set of
actions undertaken by Sidonius to Romanize those in Euric’s
service through his correspondence. This has a clearer textual
basis than Kaufmann’s speculative assertion that Namatius
must only have recently begun serving against the Saxons
(-ƖƪƛƢƖƣƣ 1995, 168).
For Sidonius, such jokes originated from ›insecurity in a
changing world‹ (ƝƖơƨƖơơ 2002a, 95). He offers us a civilizing,
Romanizing depiction of Namatius. Unlike the Saxon, he is not
a hunter, savage and fearless, but an agriculturalist. But we
have, too, an illustration of Roman identity in crisis. Hunting
was a traditional Roman aristocratic pastime: why would
a Roman be bad at it? After voicing his concern, Sidonius
remarks that he has enclosed two works of literature he
ECNNUxTGʏPKPIVQQNUkxKHDGKPIUVCVKQPGFKPVJGDCTTCEMU[QW
secure ... some leisure ... you will be able, after cleaning your
weapons, to remove likewise from your lips their linguistic rust‹
(Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.6.13). Here, zeugma highlights
the dichotomy of Roman/Barbarian in war. After the otium of
military duty, the man, too, had to be cleansed. Yet Namatius,
ʏIJVKPI$CTDCTKCPUYCUKPVJGUGTXKEGQHC)QVJ*KUVQTKCPU
frequently assume on account of his name that he was a
Roman in service to the Goths, rather than a Goth himself
(/ƖƩƝƞƨƚƣ 1984 fn. 28; *ƚƖƩƝƚƧ 1992, 91–92; 'ơƩƤƣ 1992,
174). Burns even suggests that Namatius’ employment by the
Goths was due to successful efforts by Flavius Constantius to
keep naval power out of Gothic hands ($ƪƧƣƨ 1992, 370). But
VQRQUKVVJCVʏHV[[GCTUCHVGTVJG#SWKVCPKCPUGVVNGOGPVsCHVGT
considerable breakdown of imperial authority and constant
interaction between Gothic and Gallo-Roman populations –
the Goths needed a Gallo-Roman to command their ships is
far too essentialist. Namatius’ appointment came not from
some putative ethnic folk knowledge of Roman shipbuilding,
but from politics that led senators to ally with their local
armed forces. Namatius has even been seen as a traitor (e.g.
*ƚƖƩƝƚƧ 1992, 91–92), on par with Arvandus, a friend of
Sidonius and praetorian prefect of Gaul, prosecuted for writing
to Euric, urging him to divide Gaul between himself and the
Burgundians. But Namatius might have been born into the
Gothic sortes, serving its kings loyally his entire life. Were
these categories really so static?
Sidonius implied as much. Praising Johannes, a teacher of
rhetoric in Bordeaux, for example, he says, ›…for [your pupils]
have been so moulded and trained by your teaching that,
though now in the midst of a people, however alien, they
will preserve the signs of their ancient birthright‹ (Sidonius
Apollinaris, Epist. 8.2.2).
But this was not a universal principle. Sidonius had lived
most of his life under imperial rule; he had been Prefect of
Rome. Others disagreed ($ƧƤƬƣ 2012, 404–407). By the
450s–60s those with the means and desire to leave Gothic
Aquitania had done so (/ƖƩƝƞƨƚƣ 1984, 166). Namatius’
family had perhaps stayed. Even Sidonius begrudgingly
EQPEGFGFVJCVxYKVJVJGTGOQXCNQHVJGTCPMUQHQHʏEGVJGQPN[
means by which the best men can be distinguished from their
inferiors, hereafter the only mark of nobility will be knowledge
of letters‹ (Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.2.2). If Namatius had
always lived in Gothic Gaul, tJKUxTGOQXCNQHTCPMUQHQHʏEGk
is likely to have had no meaning for him. Instead, he found
position and status in Euric’s service. His romanitas, which
Sidonius opposed to Saxon barbarism, came not from imperial
service but from Latin learning and culture, prompted by the
militarization of the provincial aristocracy in the later empire
and the adoption of stereotyped Barbarian aesthetics by
the Roman military (,ƖƢƚƨ 1997; *ƖơƨƖơơ 2007a, 101–110;
ƫƤƣ 4ƪƢƢƚơ 2007), with legal measures taken by the fourth
century to curb such ›barbaric‹ display (Cod. Theo. 14.10.1–2).
The de-barbarizing processes which Sidonius suggests that
Namatius undertake make sense in this context, illustrating
the impact that the erosion of imperial authority in the north
JCFQPVJGRQRWNCTKV[QH$CTDCTKCPCGUVJGVKEUD[VJGNCVGʏHVJ
century. The barbarism of military service was now something
that had to be consciously addressed (ƫƤƣ4ƪƢƢƚơ 2007).
But how non-Roman were these Goths? ƚơƖƥơƖƘƚ(2015)
has compellingly demonstrated that we cannot speak of the
GZKUVGPEGQHCEQJGTGPV)QVJKExMKPIFQOkKPVJGʏHVJEGPVWT[
before Euric’s treaty with Odoacer. She shows that treating
the Goths in Aquitaine before this as a coherent, distinct
polity is to fall prey to a mirage of the historiography; they
should instead be seen as military leaders, deeply involved in
Roman political affairs. No mention of Namatius’ paymasters
being Gothic is made in Sidonius’ letter. Nor is this the case
for Leo and Lampridius. In the letter to Leo, the only Goths
mentioned (albeit in Classical ethnographic form, as getae)
are ›quarrelsome, drunken, vomiting‹ women (Sidonius
Apollinaris, Epist. 8.3.2). This is a far cry from Sidonius’ re-
presentation of Euric, a ›famous king‹ who makes a foedus
›with the trembling Barbarians on the Waal‹ (Sidonius
Apollinaris, Epist. 8.3.3). It is unlikely that Sidonius would
have overtly associated Euric with such women. This was
perhaps an attempt to avoid falling foul of Euric’s wrath. In
these works, Sidonius consciously crafts his presentation of
Euric as masculine, civilized and, so it would appear, Roman.
Sidonius’ letter to Lampridius presents a common panegyrical
trope, the list of Barbarian supplicants, with Euric in the role
of emperor. The Saxons are part of this list: ›there we see the
blue-eyed Saxon, unaccustomed to fearing the land facing
the sea‹ (Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.9.5, 21–22). This
seems so like similar lists in Claudian’s and, indeed, Sidonius’
panegyrics that, had we not known the context of this poem,
its recipient would not have been thought a Barbarian at all.

13. 48
Robert Flierman’s recent monograph interprets this poem
slightly differently, suggesting that the appearance of Saxons
alongside Romans as (he alleges) broadly equal supplicants
QH'WTKEUWIIGUVUCEQNNCRUGKPVJGʏTOFKUVKPEVKQPUDGVYGGP
4QOCPCPF$CTDCTKCP*GENCKOUVJCVYGʏPFJGTGx5CZQP
seafaring without its usual connotations of piracy‹ ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ
2017, 45). One may wonder if this downplays the Romanising
ethnographic framework that still very much shaped Sidonius’
thought. Namatius was no less a servant of Euric than
Lampridius. One struggles to believe that a mention of the
Saxon, ›afraid of land, accustomed as he is to the sea‹ would
carry such peaceful connotations for one member of a relatively
intimate circle of aristocrats in Euric’s service, whilst another
YCUUGVVKPIQWVVQʏIJVVJQUGXGT[UCOG$CTDCTKCPRKTCVGU
The Saxons’ stereotyped description surely emphasizes their
barbaric qualities. Flierman also overlooks that the mention
of Romans at court relates to their gaining salvation (salutem)
from the Huns, the ›Scythian hordes‹, and the Persian Empire
(Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.9.5, 36–40). This surely would
have evoked memories of the famed commander Aëtius’
alliance with Euric’s father against Attila at the Catalaunian
Plains in AD 451. Flierman also makes a classic Vienna
School-style reading of the Saxon hairstyle described in this
poem, shaved at the scalp, as potentially indicative of ethnic
costume ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017, 45; after 2ƤƝơ1998). He treats this
as a marked change from the treatment of Saxons as more
›generalized outsiders‹ ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017, 45). One wonders if
this argument is sustainable. Flierman himself notes that an
interpretation of this hairstyle as ethnic costume cannot be
applied to Saxon dress more widely, and even in this example
such an interpretation is on shaky ground. Long hair was
typically seen not merely as barbaric, but as a symbol of
valour associated with the Roman military (ƫƤƣ4ƪƢƢƚơ 2007,
222–224). Flierman omits that not merely the Saxons but also
the Franks, in the lines immediately following, are described
as shaven-headed, explicitly in the context of their military
defeat (Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 8.9.5, 28–30). Moreover,
elsewhere in Sidonius’ letters the trope of shaven heads
is mentioned, as symbolic representation of enslavement
after military defeat (in this case of Seronatus’ rebellion by
Anthemius; Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 2.1.4; (ƧƮƚ 1994, 60-
61). It is well known, and noted by (ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ (2017, 45–46),
that distinguishing Franks and Saxons as fellow inhabitants
QHVJGNQYGT4JKPGYCUFKHʏEWNVCVVJGDGUVQHVKOGUCPFKP
this light it surely makes more sense to interpret this as a
generalized trope of the defeated Barbarian supplicant, rather
than as a ›strategy of distinction‹. These points all suggest
that Sidonius’ representation of Saxons, as mere supplicants,
cannot be treated as indicative of a general decline in the
distinction between ›a superior Rome and its barbarian foes‹
((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ2017, 45) Sidonius’ text placed Euric on par with
the might of Rome, but we need not conclude that Barbarians
therefore ceased to be Barbarians, merely that Sidonius did not
treat Euric as one in this poem.
Granted, Sidonius’s primary motivation was to build a
good relationship with Euric, but this at least tells us how
Euric’s court wished to be seen. Sidonius clearly felt that the
best means of keeping good relations with the Gothic court
was by emphasizing its Roman qualities. Within a decade
of Euric’s death, the letters of Ruricius of Limoges suggest a
similar, cordial relationship with Gothic recipients (/ƖƩƝƞƨƚƣ
2001, 111). There is an explicit reference by Sidonius to the
Goths under Euric being Gothic in Sidonius’ panegyric to Avitus
delivered in Rome (Sidonius Apollinaris, Carm. 7), but this was
in a very different context. The Italian senatorial class were
well aware of Avitus’ alliance with the court of Theoderic II.
Given political tensions between Gallic and Italian senatorial
factions at this time (*ƖơƨƖơơ 2007a, 268), to attempt to deny
Theoderic I’s ›Gothicness‹ would have been perceived as an
unacceptable omission of controversial elements of Avitus’ rise
to power (5ƞƫƖƣ 1989, 88–89).
*ƖƧƧƞƚƨ (2001, 44–47) shows that the presence of Roma-
nized elements in Euric’s Code should not lead us to fruitlessly
search for obviously ›Roman‹ or ›Barbarian‹ elements of the
NCY9JCVOCFGQPG4QOCPQT$CTDCTKCPKPVJGʏHVJEGPVWT[
was not binary division; it was as diverse as the regions where
Roman culture dominated (2ƤƝơ 2014). Euric’s opposition to
the res publica is not incompatible with Romanized depictions
of his rule. Why do we not, therefore, simply interpret his
behaviour as a ›legitimate‹ claim to Roman identity in a
EQPVGUVGF ʏGNF! 1RRQUKVKQP VQ VJKU UVGOU HTQO 'WTKEoU YCT
with what has usually been assumed to be Anthemius’ regime
in Ravenna, and a single passage from Ennodius, which
depicts Euric as hostile to Rome to the point that he relied
on interpreters in public (Ennodius, VE 89; *ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 2001, 40).
Such opposition collapses in light of Christine Delaplace’s
proposal that at the point at which these letters appear, in the
build up to and aftermath of the siege of Clermont, Euric and
Anthemius were in fact in a military alliance against Ricimer,
his successor Gundobad, and their Burgundian faction, with
whom Sidonius had recently been aligned (ƚơƖƥơƖƘƚ 2012,
276–281). Ennodius wrote later, for an audience in Italy at the
moment of its transition to rule under Theodoric the Great, and
he had connections to the Avitii family. His account describes
a dispute between Euric and Julius Nepos. It would hardly be
politic for him to extol the romanitas of the Visigothic court.
5WEJRQKPVUEQPʏTOVJGQDUGTXCVKQPD[)ƞơơƚƩƩ (2003) that
the Barbarian regna usually saw themselves as members of
the res publicaYJGPVJG[YGTGPQVKPEQPʐKEVYKVJKV/KEJCGN
Kulikowski suggests that Diaspora Studies might be a useful
framework for interpreting the negotiation of Roman and
Barbarian identities in the absence of a metropole, using
Alaric’s sack of Rome as a case study for ›colonial mimicry‹,
a misreading of the discursive grammar of imperial ideology,
culminating in its downfall: ›...over several decades of soldiers
jockeying for position within the imperial system by threatening
to destroy it, the decayed and dysfunctional system ceased to
DGYQTVJʏIJVKPIHQTk -ƪơƞƠƤƬƨƠƞ 2010, 81).

14. 49
The putative contradiction between Euric’s hostility to the
imperial regime and his imperial aspirations should be seen as
the progression of this trend to a point where Roman legitimacy
ceased to have any meaning, without the realization of this by
those competing to claim it. The Saxons may simply be read,
then, as an ideological resource in this competition.
Gregory of Tours: The post-Roman perspective
›While ... the Bretons were raging vigourously around the cities
of Nantes and Rennes, King Guntram ordered an army to move
against them, putting the duces Beppolen and Ebrachar at its
head ... for Fredegund, when she heard that Beppolen was
departing in arms, because even now she was hostile towards
him due to previous events, ordered the Saxons of the Bessin,
dressed in clothing and shorn hair according to the manner
and style of the Bretons, to go in aid of Waroch. However,
Beppolen having arrived with his followers, they entered battle
and after two days many of the Saxons and Bretons were
killed‹ (Gregory of Tours, DLH 10.9).
6JKUEQPʐKEVKPDGVYGGP)WPVTCO/GTQXKPIKCPMKPI
of Burgundy, and Waroch, ruler of Brittany, is often cited in
discussions of ethnicity in Gregory of Tours’ (c. AD 538–594)
work, Decem libri historiarum (DLH). In 1983, )ƤƛƛƖƧƩ
(2010, 213) attacked what he saw as misinterpretation of
such stories, arguing that Gregory shows little interest in the
ethnicity of particular groups, suggesting that ›[his] systematic
insensitivity to ethnic differences went hand in hand with
the levelling of earthly dignities and pretensions‹. He himself
QPN[GXGTKFGPVKʏGUJKOUGNHCUx#TXGTPKCPkKP)TGIQT[oUECUG
distinctions between Roman and Barbarian can be said to be
less meaningful (,ƖƢƚƨ 1998; 2ƤƝơ 2014). Nevertheless, the
presence of ethnic groups makes it worthwhile to examine
the uses to which they are put in Gregory’s text. One of the
QPN[ ʏXG xEQNQWTHWN GVJPKE VTCKVUk YJKEJ )QHHCTV ECP ʏPF KP
the histories – the ›distinctive costume and hairstyle‹ of the
Bretons – makes its appearance as something adopted not by
Bretons, but by Saxons in disguise ()ƤƛƛƖƧƩ 2010, 21; Gregory
of Tours, DLH 10.9). Furthermore, ,ƖƢƚƨ (1998, 66) claims
that the only ethnicities Gregory distinguished were those
of outsiders. This overlooks some subtleties. Gregory’s civic
KFGPVKV[KUUWTGN[CHQTOQHGVJPKEKV[EQPʐCVKQPQHEKXKEYKVJ
ethnic identities is problematic, but the Arverni in particular are
JGNFVQJCXGJCFCPxGVJPKEʐCXQTkVQVJGKTUV[NKPI 2ƤƝơ 2013,
17). Recent work in this area has sought to unify Christian
theological understanding of chronology and topography with
the emergence of ethnic phenomena (2ƤƝơ and *ƚƮƙƚƢƖƣƣ
2013a; 2013b). 4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ (2013, 269; 2015) shows that
Gregory of Tours’ historiographical framework, though it
granted no central role to the Franks, still handled ethnicity
self-consciously. Gregory acted as a ›cultural broker‹ who
›constituted and promoted [communities and social groupings
KPJKUVQT[?TCVJGTVJCPUKORN[TGʐGEVVJGOk(QT4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ (2013,
273–278) Gregory occupies the middle ground, between
peoples, religions, and cultures, and treated the Franks simply
as one social identity among others, with a view to integrating
them into a universal Christendom. This overcomes what
4GKOKV TGICTFU CU VJG OKURNCEGF JKUVQTKQITCRJKECN EQPʐKEV
between those who emphasize the constructed nature of
early medieval ethnicity and those who insist nevertheless
on its power to shape the world (4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ 2013, 262). These
developments in historiography and the presence of Saxons in
some of Gregory’s more explicit ›ethnic‹ material suggest that
further investigation is prudent.
Gregory’s ethnic ignorance
Who or what a Saxon ›was‹ in Gregory’s days is hard to
answer. Prevailing attitudes are that this is knowable, but was
it? Gregory’s text is decidedly unclear, for example ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ
s 'XGPD[VJGʏHVJEGPVWT[COCLQTKV[QHTGHGTGPEGU
from various sources place Saxons in cis-Rhenan locations,
KP RNCEGU CU HCT CʏGNF CU $QTFGCWZ Sidonius Apollinaris,
Carm. 8.9), Angers (Gregory of Tours, DLH 2.18), Caledonia
(Claudian, Carm. 7.88–90) and the Orkneys (Claudian, Carm.
8.31–32). Venantius Fortunatus (c. AD 560s; Venantius
Fortunatus, Carm. 3.9) refers to Bishop Felix of Nantes and
Saxon pagans. 9ƤƤƙ (1983, 6) has previously claimed that
Felix faced Saxon pirates, but there is nothing in the poem to
suggest this. Felix simply baptises them, the poem’s subject
being not piracy, but Easter. Given the evidence for an earlier
Saxon presence on the Loire, the poem may simply refer to
Saxons who were already living in Felix’s civitas. By the sixth
century, Saxons could also as easily have come from Britain
(Gildas, DEB 6JGOGCPKPIQHx5CZQPkYCUʐWKF9J[CUUWOG
that Gregory, who wrote before the formation of Carolingian
Saxony, and had read sources placing Saxons elsewhere,
referred to this region when he spoke of Saxons? Ignorance
UJQWNFDGQWTʏTUVCUUWORVKQP
Gregory’s didactic purpose
Gregory‘s concern with the gens saxonum was primarily for
didactic ends. Take, for example, the following from Book IV:
›[the Saxons were] incited by Childebert and were indignant
at the Franks for their actions the previous year‹ (Gregory of
Tours, DLH 4.16). It is clear from Childebert’s later invasion
(once he believed Chlothar to have been killed) that this was
an orchestrated assault, launched as part of the war between
the sons of Clovis and two rulers of the Merovingian kingdom,
Chlothar and Childebert, which Gregory narrates mainly in
TGNCVKQPVQ%JNQVJCToUVTGCEJGTQWUUQP%JTCOP6JKUYCTʏNNU
OQUVQHVJGʏTUVJCNHQH$QQM+8 6CD
The rebellion and the Saxon attacks seem linked. From
the sequence listed above, the Saxon invasions of Chlothar’s
territory seem less the assaults of a disgruntled Barbarian group
of tributary status on a distant border of Frankish territory, and

15. 50
more a key thrust of Childebert and Chramn’s campaign. The
relative lack of focus on Saxons shows that detailing their
actions is not the purpose of these chapters. *ƖơƨƖơơ (2007b)
UWIIGUVUVJCVVJGʏTUVSWCTVGTQH$QQM+8RTGUGPVU%JTCOPoU
poor behaviour towards another rebellious king, Merovech, to
whom Book V’s preface was perhaps addressed. The Saxons
are merely extras in this narrative. The details about them are
unimportant for Gregory’s purpose. What matters are their
actions, and how these related to Chramn. Childebert’s failure
to advise Chramn against betraying his father is emphasised,
and biblical passages are read by the clergy of Dijon to
determine Chramn’s fate (Gregory of Tours, DLH 4.16). His
subsequent death is depicted similarly to Valens’, as described
by Orosius after the battle of Adrianople, as punishment for
Valens’ Arian heresy (Gregory of Tours, DLH 4.20; Orosius
7.9–15). Religious demands of obedience are clearly the issue
at stake; the Saxons are simply a stylistic tool. Perhaps their
reputation for treachery (Gregory of Tours, DLH 4.14) rendered
VJG DGVTC[CN QH VJGKT NGCFGT C ʏVVKPI RCTCNNGN HQT %JTCOPoU
usurpation of his father.
Book IV later describes the return to Gaul of some Saxons
(who, according to Gregory, had entered Italy with the
Lombard Alboin) to ›the place from which they had originally
gone forth‹ (Gregory of Tours, DLH 4.42). On their journey,
they pillage regions as distant and diverse as Riez, Nice and
Avignon. Eventually defeated, they enter Frankish service,
settling in Sigibert’s kingdom (Gregory of Tours, DLH 4.16).
The reappearance of this group in Book V is chronologically
QWVQHRNCEG%JCRVGTʏHVGGPFGUETKDGUGXGPVUYJKEJVQQMRNCEG
KP# VJKUFCVGKUEQPʏTOGFKPVJGChronicle of Marius
of Avenches), the war the Saxons fought against the Suebi
to recover land ›left void‹ when they went to Italy. The Suebi
repeatedly offer a greater part of this land to the Saxons,
YJKEJVJGNCVVGTFGGOKPUWHʏEKGPVVJTGCVGPKPIYCT6JKUGPFU
in two battles, and the Saxons are utterly defeated (Gregory
of Tours, DLH 5.15). The chapter thus cautions against greed,
DWVKVCRRGCTUKOOGFKCVGN[CHVGTVJGUVQT[QH/GTQXGEJoUʐKIJV
from the church of St Martin at Tours in 577 (Gregory of Tours,
DLH 5.14). The reason why such a theme was selected later
Chapter Events
4.6 Theudebald dies. Chlothar succeeds to the kingdom and marries Theudebald’s wife Vuldetrada, for which he is rebuked by bishops – he
leaves her. He sends his son Chramn to the Auvergne.
4.7 Saxon rebellion against Chlothar – Chlothar ›destroys the greater part‹ and devastates Thuringia. The bishop Cato succeeds to the See
of Tours, and arranges with Chramn to eject Cautinus from Clermont so he might hold it, but this does not happen. There is hostility
between Cautinus and a priest named Anastasius over Anastasius’ rightful property.
4.8 Chramn has his residence in Clermont at this time. He is senseless in his acts. ›None capable of good or sound advice was gathered
round him‹. He commits many evil deeds.
A passage from Sallust is given, declaring it a ›hard task to write history‹, since one ›must make words correspond to facts‹ and ›most
readers put down to malevolence and envy any strictures you may make upon offences‹.
4.9 Saxon rebellion against Chlothar who is ›making his progress round‹ his kingdom. The Saxons refuse to pay tributa, there is an exchange
DGVYGGP(TCPMUCPF5CZQPU%JNQVJCTKUWPYKNNKPIVQʏIJVKUHQTEGFVQD[JKUPQDNGUCPFKUFGHGCVGF*GOCMGURGCEG
4.10 Chramn commits diverse ill deeds at Clermont. Sickens with fever. Chramn leaves Clermont for Poitiers. He desires to go over to
Childebert, prepared to betray his father. He conspires to betray Chlothar and then enters Limoges and reduces under his own dominion
›all parts of his father’s kingdom through which he had formerly made progress‹. Chlothar sends Charibert and Guntram against him.
Chramn tricks them into believing their father is dead and they ›return with the utmost speed‹ to Burgundy. Chramn pursues them and
besieges them at Chalon-sur-Saône.
%JNQVJCTʏIJVUVJG5CZQPUYJQTCXCIGCUHCTCUGWVJCXKPIDGGPxUVKTTGFWRkD[%JKNFGDGTV
4.11 %JTCOPEQOGUVQ2CTKUCPFDKPFUJKOUGNHVQ%JKNFGDGTV9JKNG%JNQVJCTKUʏIJVKPIVJG5CZQPU%JKNFGDGTVGPVGTUCPFTCXCIGUVJG
champaign of Reims.
Table 1. The Saxons and Chramn in Book IV of Gregory of Tours’ Histories.
Figure 1. The chiastic structure of the Preface to Book V of Gregory of Tours’
Histories (from *ƖơƨƖơơ 2007b, used with kind permission).
Section: Sentence: Subject:
A 1–2 Introduction: bad civil war
B1
B2
B3
B4
3
4
5
6
Refer to earlier examples
Example of Rome
Appeal to kings: wage good wars
Example of Clovis: overcame for-
eigners
C1
C2
C3
7
8
9
Clovis had no gold or silver
Kings questioned: what do they want?
They have lots of gold and silver
C4
C5
C6
10
11
12
They lack the peace of God
Kings questioned: why do they covet?
Warning: they will destroy each other
B1I
B2I
B3I
B4I
13
14
15
16
Study earlier examples
Example of Carthage
Appeal to kings: beware civil war
They will be destroyed by for-
eigners
AI
17 Epilogue: wage ›good‹ civil war

16. 51
becomes clear. In chapter seventeen, King Guntram kills two
sons of Magnachar, ostensibly for slandering Austrechild,
taking their wealth. He then loses his own children to disease,
which he recognizes as punishment for his sins. Yet he and
his nephew, Childebert, then set out to conquer territory from
Guntram’s brother Chilperic (Gregory of Tours, DLH 5.17). The
Saxon chapter thus portends the consequences of greed and
war-mongering. But why was this chronologically displaced
story used to make the point? This has been a source of some
confusion, for both other early medieval authors, and modern
historians ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017, 68–70).
A similar story is described in Book IV, giving context to
Chramn’s war. Chlothar demands tribute from some Saxons.
The Saxons continually make larger concessions for peace.
Chlothar accepts but his Franci (nobles) refuse, forcing a war,
where the Saxons defeat Chlothar (Gregory of Tours, DLH
4.14). *ƖơƨƖơơ (2003, 136) suggests that Chlothar’s men were
motivated primarily by the opportunities for advancement
and material reward afforded by warfare. This chapter’s folk-
tale-like motifs are a clear precursor to V.15. The chapters
seem to be intended to recall one another (a point also made
by (ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2014, 93–94; (ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017, 70). But the
achronological position of V.15 remains unexplained. The
NKMGNKJQQFVJCVDQVJQHVJGUGVCNGUPGCVN[ʏVVJGRTGEKUGEQWTUG
of events that Gregory describes is surely slight. Why was this
tale chosen?
The structure of Book V, never before considered, offers
an answer. *ƖơƨƖơơ (2007b) demonstrated that the Preface
to Book V forms a chiasmus outlining the overall message
of Gregory’s Histories, juxtaposing the virtue of spiritual war
against the sin of civil war (Fig. 1). Even closer examination,
prompted by this clue, reveals that the entire book is in fact
chiastic in structure, as illustrated by the above diagram
(KI|
Unsurprisingly, obedience to the chiasmus is not wholly
perfect since the organisation of such a range of material
would have been complex. Furthermore, if *ƖơƨƖơơ (2007b) is
correct about the relative chronology of the Histories, Gregory
was writing Book V as events unfolded, rendering the latter
OQTG FKHʏEWNV VQ QTFGT KPVQ C PGCV UEJGOC VJCP VJQUG QH
Books I–IV, written more clearly after the event. Still, a basic
chiastic structure can be observed, conforming well to chapter
distribution and echoing the message outlined in the preface
– the inevitable failure of earthly civil war and the success of
spiritual war.
Figure 2. The chiastic structure of Book V of Gregory of Tours’ Histories.
A1
Preface: civil war is bad, greed is bad. Spiritual war is good.
B1
5KIKDGTVJCULWUVDGGPMKNNGF/GTQXGEJFGʏGU%JKNRGTKECPF4QEEQNGPKUMKNNGF
B2
Bishop (Felix) falsely accuses another bishop (Gregory).
B3
Miracles at the tomb of St Martin. People are blind to the truth of the Church.
B4
Good, saintly people die.
C1
4GVWTPVQ)TGIQT[oUUWDLGEV/GTQXGEJDGUKGIGFCV6QWTUVTKGUVQFGH[)QFoUYKNND[NKUVGPKPIVQVJGCFXKEGQHCUQQVJUC[GTʐGGUYKVJ
Guntram Boso, escapes capture by King Guntram’s duke.
C2
#NDQKPnU5CZQPUQPCEEQWPVQHVJGKTITGGFʏIJVYKVJVJG5WGDKCPFCTGFGHGCVGF
C3
Theuderic (Breton) defeats Macliav after dispossession.
C4
Guntram kills two sons of Magnachar for their wealth. He is then left childless for his sins.
C5
Merovech dies – A punishment for civil war and for invoking a soothsayer.
Constantinople Digression – Moral: those who are generous always have wealth.
C6
Salonius and Sagittarius make war, are stripped of bishoprics, do not amend their ways.
C7
Young son of Chilperic dies of dysentery. Many signs are seen.
C8
Guntram Boso slays and escapes King Chilperic’s duke, aided by St Martin.
C9
5CZQPUQHVJG$GUUKPʏIJVKPIQPDGJCNHQH%JKNRGTKECTGMKNNGFD[VJG$TGVQPU
C10
%JKNRGTKERWPKUJGUVJGRQQTCPFEJWTEJOGPHQTPQVʏIJVKPI
C11
Chilperic imposes heavy taxes.
C12
The Bretons ravage.
Constantinople digression – Moral: conspirators and plots are always overcome.
C13
6JG$TGVQPUOCMGRTQOKUGUVQCOGPFVJGKTYC[UFQPQV#YQOCPHCNNUWPFGTCEEWUCVKQPOCP[ʏIJVQPVJGVQODQH5VKQP[UKWUCV
JGTVTKCN#PFRC[ʏPGUVQVJGEJWTEJ6JGYQOCPJCPIUJGTUGNH
C14
Many signs are seen, Chilperic’s sons die of dysentery.
B5
Many bad people die from dysentery.
B6
Many portents are seen, pestilence. Many are blind to the truth of the Church.
B7
An archdeacon at Rodez accuses Bishop (Dalmatius) falsely.
A2
Salvius sees the sword of divine wrath hanging over the house of the Merovingians.

17. 52
The mirroring of the B sections is particularly clear –
miracles mirror portents, deaths of saints mirror the deaths
of sinners, and civil war waged by the Merovingians mirrors
Gregory’s spiritual war against heretics and his success at the
trial at Berny-St-Rivière. An interesting pattern of parallels
KUFKUEGTPKDNGKPVJGVYQx%kUGEVKQPU+PVJGʏTUVEJCRVGTQH
VJGVYQUGEVKQPUCEQPʐKEVKUHQNNQYGFD[CPGUECRGDQVJ
involving Guntram Boso. In both, this is immediately followed
by a chapter about Saxons at war with a non-Frankish people
and both halves feature Bretons in nearby chapters. In both,
a king who has committed sins of greed and war loses his
sons to disease and Chilperic’s loss is continually referred to in
both halves. Both pull our gaze to Constantinople at the same
point, in chapters containing stories with a positive outcome
and clear moral message. Each half takes the reader through
a comprehensive demonstration of the outcomes of greed and
civil war, though it is made clear that damnation could be
averted with repentance. The material is carefully selected and
sequenced to allow this message to emerge.
The chapter containing Saxons in section C1
(Gregory
of Tours, DLH 5.26) is chronologically placed; the preceding
chapter is dated to the third year of Childebert’s reign (Gregory
of Tours, DLH 5.25), and the following chapter is dated to
the fourth year (Gregory of Tours, DLH 5.27). Unlike chapter
V.15, no indication of date is given, which would imply that
this chapter, describing an earlier defeat of the Saxons of the
Bessin by Waroch’s Bretons than that outlined at the start
of this chapter, is present because its events happen in the
third year of Childebert. This, then, explains Gregory’s reason
for again mentioning the return of the Saxons from Italy in
chapter 15. The war with the Sueves has parallels in the war
with the Bretons as both are against non-Franks, involve Saxon
combatants (though in the latter the army is Frankish), Saxons
are defeated, and the invading factions are shown to be sinful.
The Saxon war with the Sueves is probably the only other
instance of such a war which Gregory would have known,
selected simply to maintain a neat parallelism between the
two ›C‹ halves of the book, aiding the coherence of the book’s
chiastic structure and thus the force of the book’s argument.
This interpretation of the use of Saxons in Book V is
supported by the odd prioritisation of concerns in chapter
twenty-six:
1. Chilperic’s forces march against Waroch, and camp on the
river Vilaine.
2. The Bretons fall upon the Saxons of the Bessin and kill
them.
3. Waroch makes peace three days later, surrenders hostages,
swears an oath to Chilperic, restores the city of Vannes on
the condition that he maintain his claim on it, and pays its
annual tribute.
4. Chilperic orders a ban to be enforced against the poor and
servants of the cathedral and church of St Martin.
5. Waroch breaks his promise, seeks to annul his act, and
returns the bishop of Vannes to Chilperic. The bishop is
banished.
The greater part of the chapter is dedicated to sections 3–5.
The Saxon defeat is the only event of the war that is actually
FGUETKDGF6JG5CZQPUʏIJVHQT%JKNRGTKE[GVVJGGXGPVUNGCFKPI
to Chilperic’s victory are left out: the repulsive, gritty details of
warfare do not interest Gregory (pace $ƖƘƝƧƖƘƝ 2002, 363).
6JG YGKIJV IKXGP VQ VJG ʏPCN VJTGG UGEVKQPU FGET[KPI
ITGGFKPʏFGNKV[CPFCDWUGQHVJG%JWTEJUJQYUVJGGXGPVU
Gregory thought important. The Saxons of the Bessin are a
small detail, given disproportionate weight to serve the chias-
mus. The placing of chapters 44–49 out of correct chrono-
logical position suggests, too, that Gregory wished to stress his
religious method (*ƖơƨƖơơ 2002b, 340–341).
This might explain the fate of the Saxons of the Bessin
in Book X. This has similarities with the above passage:
again there is a war between Franks and Bretons. Again it is
5CZQPUHTQOVJG$GUUKPYJQʏIJVVJQWIJVJKUVKOGKPUGETGV
disguised as Bretons. Again, many Saxons die, and a major
VWTPKPVJGEQPʐKEVQEEWTUCHVGTVJTGGFC[UsVJGOCKP(TCPMKUJ
combatant, Beppolen, is slain after Ebrachar retreats to usurp
him. After Beppolen’s death, Waroch sues for peace, again
making oaths that he breaks. On their journey, Beppolen
and Ebrachar commit many crimes. There is a difference: this
VKOGVJGEQPʐKEVGPFUKPVJGFGHGCVQHVJGKPXCFGTUVJTQWIJ
Waroch’s treachery (Gregory of Tours, DLH 10.9).
Why do the Saxons of the Bessin adopt Breton dress?
Goffart calls it ›a stratagem by a queen considered to be
particularly wicked‹ ()ƤƛƛƖƧƩ 1982, 80). Flierman argues
similarly, after Goffart and Daily ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017, 67; ƖƞơƮ
2015, 152–160). But, although this is the case for many of
Gregory’s tales about Fredegund, in this particular instance
the characterisation may be unfair. It is hard to believe that
the discovery of Saxons in the Breton army would have
JCF UGTKQWU TCOKʏECVKQPU s YG JCXG UGGP VJCV VJG[ YGTG
frequently involved in military action in the region. Flierman
has suggested, misreading Halsall, that they may have been
mercenaries, in a social bond with their employer that would
have rendered their discovery damning for Fredegund. But such
suggestions are highly speculative, and I would propose that
*CNUCNNoUEQOOGPVUQPVJGFKHʏEWNV[QHJKTKPIOGTEGPCTKGUKP
the post-Roman period renders this less likely an interpretation
than Flierman suggests, given the other reasons Halsall gives
to doubt the existence of mercenaries in this period ((ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ
2017, 67, citing *ƖơƨƖơơ 2003, 111–112). A different view
is possible. Goffart notes that Fredegund dies unpunished for
far greater crimes ()ƤƛƛƖƧƩ 1982, 80). Few other persons so
often avoid divine retribution in Gregory’s work. But Goffart
rightly associates many of Fredegund’s crimes with Gregory’s
few references to ethnic traits – might Gregory’s words have
had a symbolic meaning?
6JGUKOKNCTUGSWGPEGOC[CKOVQGXQMGOGOQTKGUQH$QQM|8
Halsall proposes that Gregory’s portrayal of Chilperic and
Fredegund as consistently negative may be mistaken, arguing
thatGregoryfearedGuntrammoreandsuggestingthataccounts
of Guntram’s actions reveal his true merits, despite Gregory’s
apparent praise (*ƖơƨƖơơ 2002b, 342, 348–349). The passage

18. 53
he highlights as evidence for a positive portrayal of Chilperic
and Fredegund is that at the end of the C section of the
chiasmus in Book V, in which Fredegund bitterly repents her
sins, with phrasing similar to Book V’s preface (*ƖơƨƖơơ 2007b,
303–304). Gregory’s focus on Fredegund and her Saxons may
subtly criticize Guntram, re-invoking the same themes as Book
V, with the previously offending party now in the right.
Compare the statements about Fredegund in this passage
with those of Guntram’s duces. They commit many crimes.
For the entire journey they blaspheme, taunt, and insult
one another. Upon arrival in the Vilaine, they destroy local
dwellings. Finally, Ebrachar betrays Beppolen, suffers harm
at Waroch’s hands, pillages the territory of Tours, and is
reproached by Guntram (Gregory of Tours, DLH 10.9). All we
learn of Fredegund is her grudge against Beppolen. Waroch’s
crimes are hinted at, but far less obviously than the duces’.
In comparison to the relative success of Chilperic’s campaign,
itself far from morally virtuous, Guntram’s campaign is an
unmitigated disaster. Such demonstrations of incompetence,
FKUNQ[CNV[ CPF ETKOG D[ VYQ QH )WPVTCOoU QHʏEGTU FKF PQV
paint him in good light. Fredegund, though no saint, is not
the villain. The order for the Saxons to adopt Breton dress
is a metaphorical re-shaping of the events of 5.26. Where
previously the Saxons fought for the sinning party, in adopting
the mantle of the Bretons they become those who deliver
FKXKPGRWPKUJOGPVQPVJGDCVVNGʏGNF
Gregory’s ethnic perspective
)ƤƛƛƖƧƩ (1982, 89, 99) once called Gregory an ethnic ›non-
partisan‹, considering his sympathies ›not [to be] involved with
any ethnic group as such, but with actions whose morality
he approved of‹, giving the Saxon wars with the Sueves and
Chlothar as examples. Yet Goffart was surely mistaken when
he stated that ethnicity to Gregory was a simple matter of
›identifying labels, of no interest in itself‹ ()ƤƛƛƖƧƩ 1982, 94).
The above reveals Gregory doing precisely the sort of cultural
brokerage Reimitz has outlined. Gregory’s downplaying of
ethnicity as a divisive force was conscious, derived from his
particulareschatologicalworldview(4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ2015,65–69).Yet,
subconsciously, assumptions persisted about ethnic groups.
His exposure to political information beyond Gaul came from
Merovingian sources, and 2ƤƝơ (2002, 138) has shown that
Saxons, among others, were seen in Merovingian discourse
within a generalized belt of Barbarian gentes. Thus, although
Gregory consciously considered foreignness unimportant, he
still held implicit assumptions about foreigners. Flierman’s
proposal, that the Saxons functioned as part of a framework
of ›calculated deconstruction‹ of the notion that groups such
as Saxons were ›automatic outsiders‹, is surely correct. But
even authors consciously attempting to dismantle Roman
GVJPQITCRJKEHTCOGYQTMUYGTGECRCDNGQHDGKPIKPʐWGPEGF
by them. Though Gregory knew the two mirrored groups of
Saxons in Book V were of different geographical origins, he
saw them both as ›Saxons‹, and felt a mirroring of the two
YQWNFECTT[UWHʏEKGPVTJGVQTKECNYGKIJVHQTJKUTGCFGTURGTJCRU
the Merovingian dynasty, to serve his purpose. Surely there is
CEQPEGRVWCNEQPʐCVKQPQHVJGVYQDG[QPFOGTGNCDGNNKPI
but this does not mean the two groups were related, or had
much in common. Thus, though the Franks were themselves
not central to his histories, their perspective on the world, with
its own inherited Classical ethnographic frameworks, shaped
Gregory’s own. This led him to subconsciously homogenize
diverse peoples, even if the ethnic assumptions made in his
choice of material were overruled by the conscious rhetorical
ends to which they were put. As attested in the symbolic
re-imagining of the Saxons of the Bessin in two similarly-
RQTVTC[GFEQPʐKEVUGVJPKENCDGNUYGTGVJGOUGNXGUXKGYGFCU
morally neutral. Gregory perceives historical phenomena as
›[embodiments of] spiritual patterns historically acting in and
through visible and palpable human events‹ (ƚ 0ƞƚ 2002,
279). The Saxons were put to use, then, as an indicator for the
direction in which divine retribution fell at a given moment.
Conclusion
What do these authors tell us about this period of transition?
They speak of a transition of emphasis: as imperial authority
degraded, a dispersal of mental perspectives took place. From
the singular, organized in relation to a homogenizing imperial
and metropolitan centre, to a multiplicity of viewpoints
grounded in a landscape of numerous, varying regional
and conceptual loci. The conceptual dichotomy of Roman/
Barbarian is exchanged for that of Godly/Sinful. Ethnic
groups simply become one of many means by which this
eschatological world view is represented. Can we learn much
about the Saxons as a gens, about their political structures or
UQEKCNRTCEVKEGUHTQOVJKU!6JGFKHʏEWNVKGUQHVGZVWCNN[NQECVKPI
the Saxons in time and space (5ƥƧƞƣƜƚƧ 2003), and identifying
ethnic groups through archaeological means ($ƧƖƩƝƚƧ 2004;
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2011; *ƖƧơƖƣƙ 2017b) lead me to doubt this. But by
using the Saxons as a lens to focus our reading, we achieve
greater understanding of the shifting mentalités of those who
would represent them.
Acknowledgements
This article is based on a far more unwieldy MA dissertation
completed at the University of York in 2013. I am grateful to
Prof. Guy Halsall, who supervised it, for his continued support
in bringing the better aspects of the arguments contained
therein to print as I completed my doctoral thesis. Veronika
Egetenmeyr, Sam Barber, Kat Fliegel, Catherine Hailstone and
Aaron Brown also read the manuscript at various stages, and
Andrew Welton offered numerous helpful comments. The
article is much improved by their input. I wish to thank the
organisers of the Sachsensymposion in Leipzig in 2015 for

19. 54
inviting me to participate as a late addition to the programme,
and for their subsequent invitation to contribute to this volume.
Sources
Marius of Avenches
Marius of Avenches, Chronicle. From Roman to Merovingian Gaul, trans. A.
C. Murray (Peterborough/Ontario 2000) 101–108.
Claudian, Carm.
Claudian, Carmina. Ed. by M. Platnauer (London 1922).
Cod. Theo.
T. Mommsen and M. Meyer (eds.), Codex Theodosianus (Berlin 1904).
Ennodius, VE
Ennodius, Vita Epiphanii. In: F. Vogel (ed.), MGH Auctores Antiquissimi, vol.
7: Ennodi Opera (Berlin 1885) 203–214.
Gildas, DEB
Gildas, De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae. Ed. by T. Mommsen. MGH
Auctores Antiquissimi, vol. 13 (Berlin 1898).
Gregory of Tours, DLH
Gregory of Tours, Decem libri historiarum. Ed. by B. Krusch and W. Levison.
MGH Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum, vol. 1,1 (Hanover 1951).
Orosius
Orosius, Seven books of history against the pagans. Trans. with an
introduction and notes by A. T. Fear (Liverpool 2010).
Sidonius Apollinaris, Carm.
Apollinaris Sidonii, Epistulae et Carmina. Ed. by Ch. Lüthjohann. MGH
Auctores Antiquissimi, vol. 8 (Berlin 1887).
Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist.
Apollinaris Sidonii, Epistulae et Carmina. Ed. by Ch. Lüthjohann. MGH
Auctores Antiquissimi, vol. 8 (Berlin 1887).
Venantius Fortunatus, Carm.
Venantius Fortunatus, Carmina. In: F. Leo (ed.), MGH Auctores Antiquissimi,
vol. 4, no. 1: Venanti Honori Clementiani Fortunati presbyteri Italici Opera
poetica (Berlin 1881) 1–386.
Bibliography
$ƖƘƝƧƖƘƝ 2002
B. Bachrach, Gregory of Tours as a military historian. In: /ƞƩƘƝƚơơ and
9ƤƤƙ 2002, 351–363.
$ƖƧƩƝƤơƤƢƚƬ 1984
Ph. Bartholomew, Fourth-century Saxons. Britannia 15, 1984, 169–185.
$ƧƖƩƝƚƧ 2004
S. Brather, Ethnische Interpretationen in der frühgeschichtlichen Archäo-
logie. Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertums-
kunde 42 (Berlin 2004).
$ƧƤƬƣ 2012
P. Brown, Through the eye of a needle (Princeton 2012).
$ƧƪƗƖƠƚƧ 2004
R. Brubaker, Ethnicity without groups (Cambridge, MA 2004).
$ƪƧƣƨ 1992
V. Burns, The Visigothic settlement in Aquitaine: Imperial motives. Historia:
Zeitschrift fur Alte Geschichte 41, 1992, 362–373.
ƚơƖƥơƖƘƚ 2012
C. Delaplace, The So-Called ›Conquest of the Auvergne‹ (469–75) in the
History of the Visigothic Kingdom. Relations between the Roman Elites
of Southern Gaul, the Central Imperial Power in Rome and the Military
Authority of the Federates on the Periphery. In: D. Brakke and D. Deliyannis
(eds.), Shifting Cultural Frontiers in Late Antiquity (London 2012) 271–282.
ƚơƖƥơƖƘƚ 2015
%GNCRNCEG.CʏPFGNo'ORKTGTQOCKPFo1EEKFGPV4QOGGVNGU9KUKIQVJU
de 382 à 551. Série Histoire ancienne (Rennes 2015).
ƖƞơƮ2015
E. T. Daily, Queens, Consorts, Concubines: Gregory of Tours and the women
of the Merovingian elite. Mnemonesyne Supplements: Late Antique
Literature Ser. 381 (Leiden 2015).
ƚ0ƞƚ 2002
G. De Nie, Gregory’s use of metaphor. In: /ƞƩƘƝƚơơ and 9ƤƤƙ 2002,
227–239.
ƞƚƛƚƣƗƖƘƝ 2013
S. Diefenbach, ›Bischofsherrschaft‹. Zur Transformation der politischen
Kultur im spätantiken und frühmittelalterlichen Gallien. In: S. Diefenbach
and G. M. Müller (eds.), Gallien in Spätantike und Frühmittelalter: Kultur-
geschichte einer Region (Berlin 2013) 91–152.
'ơƩƤƣ 1992
*'NVQPGHGPEGKPʏHVJEGPVWT[)CWN+P,(TKPMYCVGTCPF*'NVQP
(eds.), Fifth-century Gaul: A crisis of identity? (Cambridge 1992) 167–176.
(ơƚƢƞƣƜ 2010
R. Fleming, Britain after Rome (London 2010).
(ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2014
4(NKGTOCP2CICP2KTCVG5WDLGEV5CKPVGʏPKPICPF4GFGʏPKPI5CZQPU
150–900 A.D. [PhD Thesis, University of Utrecht 2014].
(ơƞƚƧƢƖƣ 2017
R. Flierman, Saxon Identities, AD 150–900. Bloomsbury Studies in Early
Medieval History (London 2017).
(ƧƮƚ 1994
D. Frye, The Meaning of Sidonius, Ep. 2,1,4. Eranos 92, 1994, 60–61.
)ƞơơƚƩƩ 2003
A. Gillett, Envoys and political communication in the late antique west,
411–533. Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought, Ser. 4, 55
(Cambridge 2003).
)ƤƛƛƖƧƩ 1982
W. Goffart, Foreigners in Gregory of Tours. Florilegium 4, 1982, 80–99.
)ƤƛƛƖƧƩ 2010
W. Goffart, The Narrators of Barbarian History (Notre Dame 2010).
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2002a
G. Halsall, Funny Foreigners: Laughing with the Barbarians in Late
Antiquity. In: G. Halsall (ed.) Humour, History and Politics in Late Antiquity
and the Early Middle Ages (Cambridge 2002) 95–96.
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2002b
G. Halsall, Nero and Herod? The death of Chilperic and Gregory’s writing of
history. In: /ƞƩƘƝƚơơ and 9ƤƤƙ 2002, 377–350.

20. 55
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2003
G. Halsall, Warfare and society in the barbarian west, 450–900 (London
2003).
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2007a
G. Halsall, Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376–568.
Cambridge Medieval Textbooks (Cambridge 2007).
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2007b
G. Halsall, The preface to Book V of Gregory of Tours’ histories: Its form,
EQPVGZVCPFUKIPKʏECPEG'PINKUJ*KUVQTKECN4GXKGYs
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2011
G. Halsall, Ethnicity and early medieval cemeteries. Arquelogia y Territorio
Medieval 18, 2011, 15–27.
*ƖơƨƖơơ 2013
G. Halsall, Worlds of Arthur: Facts and Fictions of the Dark Ages (Oxford
2013).
*ƖƧơƖƣƙ 2017a
J. M. Harland, Rethinking Ethnicity and ›Otherness‹ in Early Anglo-Saxon
England. Medieval Worlds 5, 2017, 113–148.
*ƖƧơƖƣƙ2017b
J. M. Harland, Memories of migration? The ›Anglo-Saxon‹ burial costume of
the 5th century AD. Antiquity 93, 2019, 1–16.
*ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 1992
J. Harries, Sidonius Apollinaris, Rome and the barbarians: A climate of
treason? In: J. F. Drinkwater and H. Elton (eds.), Fifth-century Gaul: A crisis
of identity? (Cambridge 1992) 298–308.
*ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 1994
J. Harries, Sidonius Apollinaris and the Fall of Rome, AD 407–485 (Oxford
1994).
*ƖƧƧƞƚƨ 2001
J. Harries, Not the Theodosian Code. In: R. W. Mathisen and D. Shanzer
(eds.), Society and culture in late antique gaul: Revisiting the sources
(Aldershot 2001) 39–51.
*ƚƖƩƝƚƧ 1992
P. Heather, The emergence of the Visigothic kingdom. In: J. F. Drinkwater
and H. Elton (eds.), Fifth-century Gaul: A crisis of identity? (Cambridge
1992) 84–94.
*ƚƖƩƝƚƧ 1999
P. Heather, The barbarian in late antiquity: image, reality and
transformation. In: R. Miles (ed.), Constructing Identities in Late Antiquity
(London 1999) 234–258.
,ƖƢƚƨ 1997
',COGU6JGOKNKVCTKUCVKQPQH4QOCPUQEKGV[s+P#|0,ÔTIGPUGP
CPF $| . %NCWUGP GFU /KNKVCT[ #URGEVU QH 5ECPFKPCXKCP 5QEKGV[ KP
a European Perspective, AD 1–1300. Publications from the National
Museum/Studies in Archaeology and History 2 (Copenhagen 1997).
,ƖƢƚƨ 1998
E. James, Gregory of Tours and the Franks. In: A. C. Murray (ed.), After
Rome’s Fall: Narrators and sources of early medieval history, essays
presented to Walter Goffart (Toronto 1998) 51–66.
-ƖƪƛƢƖƣƣ 1995
F. M. Kaufmann, Studien zu Sidonius Apollinaris. Europäische Hochschul-
schriften: Reihe 3, Geschichte und ihre Hilfswissenschaften 681 (Frankfurt
1995).
-ƪơƞƠƤƬƨƠƞ 2010
M. Kulikowski, The fall of Roman arms. In: J. Lipps, C. Machado and Ph. von
Rummel (eds.), The Sack of Rome in 410 AD: The event, its context, and its
impact. Palilia 28 (Wiesbaden 2010) 77–86.
/ƖƩƝƞƨƚƣ 1984
R. W. Mathisen, Emigrants, exiles and survivors: Aristocratic options in
Visigothic Aquitania. Phoenix 38, 1984, 159–170.
/ƖƩƝƞƨƚƣ 2001
R. W. Mathisen, The letters of Ruricius of Limoges. In: R. W. Mathisen and
D. Shanzer (eds.), Society and culture in late antique Gaul: Revisiting the
sources (Aldershot 2001) 101–115.
/ƞƩƘƝƚơơ and 9ƤƤƙ 2002
K. Mitchell and I. N. Wood (eds.), The World of Gregory of Tours. Cultures,
Beliefs and Traditions 8 (Leiden 2002).
2ƤƝơ 1998
W. Pohl, Telling the Difference – Signs of Ethnic Identity. In: W. Pohl and
H. Reimitz (eds.), Strategies of Distinction. The Construction of Ethnic
Communities, 300–800 (Leiden 1998).
2ƤƝơ 2002
W. Pohl, Contemporary perceptions of Lombard Italy. In: /ƞƩƘƝƚơơ and
9ƤƤƙ 2002, 131–144.
2ƤƝơ 2013
9 2QJN +PVTQFWEVKQP s UVTCVGIKGU QH KFGPVKʏECVKQP # OGVJQFQNQIKECN
RTQʏNG+P2ƤƝơ and *ƚƮƙƚƢƖƣƣ 2013b, 1–64.
2ƤƝơ 2014
W. Pohl, Romanness: A multiple identity and its changes. Early Medieval
Europe 22/4, 2014, 406–418.
2ƤƝơ and *ƚƮƙƚƢƖƣƣ 2013a
W. Pohl and G. Heydemann (eds.), Post-Roman transitions: Christian and
barbarian identities in the early medieval west. Cultural Encounters in Late
Antiquity and the Middle Ages 14 (Turnhout 2013).
2ƤƝơ and *ƚƮƙƚƢƖƣƣ 2013b
92QJNCPF)*G[FGOCPP GFU 5VTCVGIKGUQHKFGPVKʏECVKQP'VJPKEKV[CPF
religion in early medieval Europe. Cultural Encounters in Late Antiquity and
the Middle Ages 13 (Turnhout 2013).
4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ 2013
H. Reimitz, Cultural brokers of a common past: History, identity, and
ethnicity in Merovingian historiography. In: 2ƤƝơ and *ƚƮƙƚƢƖƣƣ 2013b,
257–301.
4ƚƞƢƞƩƯ 2015
H. Reimitz, History, Frankish Identity and the Framing of Western Ethnicity,
550–850. Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought Ser. 4/101
(Cambridge 2015).
4ƤƪƨƨƚƖƪ 2000
Ph. Rousseau, Sidonius and Majorian: The Censure in »Carmen« V. Historia:
Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 49/2, 2000, 251–257.
ƫƤƣ4ƪƢƢƚơ 2007
Ph. von Rummel, Habitus barbarus: Kleidung und Repräsentation spät-
antiker Eliten im 4. und 5. Jahrhundert. Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon
der Germanischen Altertumskunde 55 (Berlin 2007).
5ƞƫƖƣ 1989
H. Sivan, Sidonius Apollinaris, Theodoric II, and Gothic-Roman politics from
Avitus to Anthemius. Hermes 117, 1989, 85–94.

21. 56
5ƥƧƞƣƜƚƧ 2003
/ 5RTKPIGT .QECVKQP KP URCEG CPF VKOG +P # )TGGP CPF (| 5KGI
mund (eds.), The Continental Saxons from the migration period to
the tenth century: An ethnographic perspective. Studies in Historical
Archaeoethnology 6 (Woodbridge 2003) 11–36.
5Ʃƚƫƚƣƨ 1933
%|'5VGXGPU5KFQPKWU#RQNNKPCTKUCPFJKUCIG 1ZHQTF
9ƤƤƙ 1983
I. N. Wood, The Merovingian North Sea. Occasional Papers on Medieval
Topics 1 (Alingsas 1983).
James M. Harland
DFG Center for Advanced Studies 2496, ›Migration and
Mobility in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages‹
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
Keplerstr. 2
DE 72074 Tübingen
james.harland@philosophie.uni-tuebingen.de