Selections From the Eight Books of Miracles83
Attitude toward Secular Learning
(Preface, Book in Honor of the Martyrs)
The priest Jerome, next to the apostle Paul the best teacher of the church, tells us that he was brought before the judgment-seat of the eternal Judge and subjected to torture and severely punished because he was in the habit of reading Cicero’s clevernesses and Vergil’s lies, and that he said in the presence of the holy angels and the very Ruler of all that he would never thereafter read these, but would occupy himself in future only with such [writings] as would be judged worthy of God and suited to the edification of the church. Moreover the apostle Paul says: “Let us follow after things which make for peace and things whereby we may edify one another.” And elsewhere: “Let no corrupt speech proceed out of your mouth; but such as is good for edifying, that it may give grace to them that hear.” Therefore we too ought to follow after, to write, and to speak the things that edify the church of God, and by holy instruction bring weak minds to a knowledge of the perfect faith. And we ought not to relate lying tales nor to pursue the wisdom of philosophers that is hateful to God, lest by God’s judgment we fall under sentence of eternal death.84…
Observance of the Lord’s Day
(Ibid., ch. 15)
In the territory of this city [Tours] at Lingeais, a woman who lived there moistened flour on the Lord’s day and shaped a loaf, and drawing the coals aside she covered it over with hot ashes to bake. When she did this her right hand was miraculously set on fire and began to burn. She screamed and wept and hastened to the village church in which relics of the blessed John are kept. And she prayed and made a vow that on this day sacred to the divine name she would do no work, but only pray. The next night she made a candle as tall as herself. Then she spent the whole night in prayer, holding the candle in her hand all the time, and the flame went out and she returned home safe and sound.
Relics Handed Down in Gregory’s Family
(Ibid., ch. 83)
I shall now describe what was brought to pass through the relics which my father carried with him in former times. When Theodobert85 gave orders that sons of men in Auvergne should be taken as hostages, my father, at that time lately married, wished to be protected by relics of the saints, and he asked a certain bishop kindly to give him some, thinking he would be kept safe by such protection when absent on his distant journey. Then he enclosed the holy ashes in a gold case the shape of a pea-pod and placed them around his neck; but the man did not know the blessed names. He was accustomed to relate that he was saved by them from many dangers; for he bore witness that by their miraculous power he had often escaped attacks of highwaymen and dangers on rivers and the furies of civil war and thrusts of the sword. And I shall not fail to tell what I saw of these with my own eyes. After my father’s death my mother always wore these precious things on her person. Now the grain harvest had come and great grain stacks were gathered at the threshing places. And in those days when the threshing was going on, a cold spell came on, and seeing that Limagne86 has no forests, being all covered with crops, the threshers made themselves fires of straw, since there was nothing else to make a fire of. Meantime all went away to eat. And behold, the fire gradually increased and began to spread slowly straw by straw. Then the piles suddenly caught, with the south wind blowing; it was a great conflagration and there began a shouting of men and shrieking of women and crying of children.87 Now this was happening on our own land. My mother, who wore these relics hanging on her neck, learned this, and sprang from the table and lifted up the holy relics against the masses of flame, and all the fire went out in a moment so that scarcely a spark of fire could be found among the burnt piles of straw and it did no harm to the grain which it had just caught.
Many years later I received these relics from my mother; and when we were going from Burgundy to Auvergne, a great storm came upon us and the sky flashed with many lightnings and roared with heavy crashes of thunder. Then I drew the blessed relics from my bosom and raised my hand against the cloud; it immediately divided into two parts and passed on the right and left and did no harm to us or any one else thereafter. But being a young man of an ardent temperament I began to be puffed up with vain glory and to think silently that this had been granted not so much to the merits of the saints as to me personally, and I openly boasted to my comrades on the journey that I had merited by my blamelessness what God had bestowed. At once my horse suddenly shied beneath me and dashed me to the ground; and I was so severely shaken up by the fall that I could hardly get up. I perceived that this had come of vanity, and it was enough to put me on guard thenceforth against being moved by the spur of vain glory. For whenever it happened after that that I had the merit to behold any of the miracles of the saints, I loudly proclaimed that they were wrought by God’s gift through faith in the saints.
Comparative “Merit” of Gregory and his Mother
(Ibid. ch. 85)
… On this matter I recall what I heard told in my youth. It was the day of the suffering of the great martyr Polycarp, and his festival was being observed at Riom, a village of Auvergne. The reading of the martyrdom had been finished and the other readings which the priestly canon requires, and the time came for offering the sacrifice. The deacon, having received the tower88 in which the mystery of the Lord’s body was contained, started with it to the door, and when he entered the church to place it on the altar, it slipped from his hand and floated along in the air and thus came to the altar, and the deacon was never able to lay hands on it; and I believe this happened for no other reason than that he was defiled in his conscience. For it was often told that he had committed adultery. It was granted only to one priest and three women, of whom my mother was one, to see this; the rest did not see it. I was present, I confess, at this festival at the time, but I had not the merit to see this miracle.
A Fly might be a Demon
(Ibid. ch. 103)
Pannichius, a priest of Poitou, when sitting at dinner with some friends he had invited, asked for a drink. When it was served, a very troublesome fly kept flying about the cup and trying to soil it. The priest waved it off with his hand a number of times, but it would go off a little and then try to get back, and he perceived that it was a crafty device of the enemy. He changed the cup to his left hand and made a cross with his right; then he divided the liquor in the cup into four parts and lifted it up high and poured it on the ground. For it was very plain that it was a device of the enemy.89
Miracles in Gregory’s Family
(Book on the Miracles of St. Julian, Ch. 23, 24)
At that time my father’s brother Gallus was bishop of Auvergne, and I do not think I should fail to tell how he was aided in his youth by a miracle of the saint. Now I have often described the ruin king Theodoric brought upon Auvergne, when none of their property was left to either old or young except the bare land which the barbarians were unable to carry off.90 In those days, then, my uncle of glorious memory who afterwards, as I have told, governed the church of Auvergne in the high office of bishop, was a ward; and his property was so plundered by the soldiers that there was nothing at all left that was available; and he himself used often to go on foot with only one attendant to the village of Brioude.91 It happened once when he was trudging along on this journey, that he took his shoes off on account of the heat, and as he walked in his bare feet he stepped on a sharp thorn. This by chance had been cut, but was still lying on the ground and was concealed point upward in the green grass. It entered his foot and went clear through and then broke off and could not be drawn out. The blood ran in streams and as he could not walk he begged the blessed martyr’s aid and after the pain had grown a little less he went on his way limping. But the third night the wound began to gather and there was great pain. Then he turned to the source from which he had already obtained help and threw himself down before the glorious tomb; when the watch was finished he returned to bed and was overcome by sleep while awaiting the miraculous help of the martyr. On arising later he felt no pain and examining his foot he could not see the thorn which had entered it; and he perceived it had been drawn from his foot. He looked carefully for it and found it in his bed and saw with wonder how it had come out. When bishop he used to exhibit the place, where a great hollow was still to be seen, and to testify that this had been a miracle of the blessed martyr.
A long time after, when the festival of the blessed martyr came, my father with all his household made haste to attend the joyful celebration. As we were on the way, my older brother Peter was seized by a fever and became so ill that he could not move about or take food. We journeyed on in great grief and it was doubtful whether he would recover or die. In this state of distress we at length arrived; we entered the church and worshipped at the holy martyr’s tomb. The sick boy cast himself down on the pavement, praying for a cure by the glorious martyr. Finishing his prayer he returned to his lodging and the fever went down a little. When night came we hastened to keep watch and he asked to be carried along, and lying before the tomb he begged the martyr’s favor all night long. When the watch was over he asked them to gather dust from the blessed tomb and give it to him in a drink, and hang it about his neck. This was done, and the heat of the fever went down so that on the very same day he took food without suffering and walked about wherever his fancy took him.
Gregory’s Modesty92
(Preface, The Four Books on the Miracles of St. Martin)
The miracles which the Lord our God deigned to work through the blessed Martin, his bishop, when living in the body, He still deigns to confirm daily in order to strengthen the faith of believers. He who worked miracles through him when he was in the world, now honors his tomb with miracles, and He who at that time sent him to save the perishing heathen, [now] bestows through him blessings on the Christians. Therefore let no one have doubt about the miracles worked in former time when he sees the bounty of the present wonders bestowed, when he looks upon the lame being raised up, the blind receiving sight, demons being driven out and every other kind of disease being cured through his healing power. As for me I will establish belief in the book written about his life by earlier writers, by relating for posterity at God’s command his present-day miracles as far as I can recall them. This I would not presume to do if I had not been warned twice or thrice in a vision. I call all-powerful God to witness that I once saw in a dream at mid-day many who were crippled and overwhelmed by various diseases being cured in St. Martin’s church, and I saw this in the presence of my mother who said to me: “Why are you so sluggish about writing of these things that you see?” I replied: “You know well enough that I am unskilled in letters, and that, simple and untrained as I am, I would not dare to describe such wonderful miracles. I wish Severus or Paulinus were alive or that Fortunatus at the least were here to describe them. I have no skill for such a task and I should be blamed if I undertook it.” But she said: “Don’t you know that now-a-days on account of the people’s ignorance one who speaks as you can is more clearly understood? Therefore do not hesitate or delay, for you will be guilty if you pass this over in silence.” So I wished to follow her advice and was doubly tortured with grief and fear; grief that miracles as great as were done under our predecessors should not be recorded; fear of undertaking so noble a task, ignorant as I am. However, led on by the hope of divine mercy, I am going to attempt the task thus urged upon me. For, as I suppose, He who produced water in the desert from a dry rock and cooled the thirsty people, is able to set these matters forth in my words; and it will be surely proved that he has again opened the ass’s mouth if he deigns to open my lips and make known these miracles through an untaught person like me. But why should I fear my ignorance when the Lord our God and Redeemer chose not orators, but fishermen, not philosophers, but countrymen, to destroy the vanity of worldly wisdom. I have confidence, then, thanks to your prayers, that even if my rude speech cannot adorn the page, the great bishop will give it fame by his glorious miracles.
Remarkable Exercise of “Virtue” by St. Martin
(Ibid., Book I, Ch. 20)
Since I have told two or three times how miracles were performed and dangers averted by the mere invocation of the glorious name, I shall now describe how the blessed bishop was called upon and brought help to one who was falling headlong to death!93 Ammonius, an officer of the holy church, arose from dinner somewhat under the influence of wine, and, the enemy giving him a push, he fell headlong over a lofty cliff that bordered the road. There was there a drop of about two hundred feet. While he was whirling about as he fell headlong and was flying down without wings he kept crying for aid from St. Martin at every instant of his fall. Then he felt as if he were tossed from a saddle by some one and he landed among the trees that were in the valley. And thus coming down slowly limb by limb he reached the ground without danger of death. However that the plotter’s undertaking might not seem to have been completely in vain, he suffered a slight injury in one foot. But he went to the glorious master’s church and prayed and was relieved of all pain.
Miracles Worked on Gregory
(Ibid., Book I, ch. 32, 33)
Having related the miracles performed for others, I shall tell what the miraculous power of this protector has done for my unworthy self. In the hundred and sixtieth year after that holy and praiseworthy man, the blessed bishop Martin, was taken up to heaven, when the holy bishop Eufronius was governing the church of Tours in his seventh year, and in the second year of the glorious king Sigibert, I became ill with malignant pimples and fever, and being unable to eat or drink I was reduced to such a state that I lost all hope of the present life and thought of nothing but of the details of my burial. For death was constantly raging at me, eager to separate my soul from my body. Then when I was almost dead I called on the name of the blessed champion Martin and made some improvement, and began slowly and painfully to prepare for my journey; for I had made my mind up that I ought to visit his venerable tomb. And my desire was so great that I did not even wish to live if I was to be delayed in going.94 Although I had scarcely escaped from a dangerous fever, I began to be on fire again with the fever of desire. And so, although not yet strong, I hastened to go with my people. After two or three stages, on entering the forest, I fell ill of the fever again, and was in such a serious condition that they all said I was dying. Then my friends came to me and saw I was very weak, and said: “Let us return home and if God wishes to call you, you will die in your own home; and if you recover, you will make the journey you have vowed more easily. For it is better to return home than to die in the wilderness.” On hearing this I wept bitterly and bewailed my ill-luck, and said: “I adjure you by all-powerful God and the day of judgment which all fear who have to make answer there, that you agree to my request. Don’t give up the journey we have begun, and if I have merit to see the holy Martin’s church, I shall thank God; but if not, carry my dead body there and bury it, because I am determined not to return home, if I have not the merit to appear at his tomb.” Then we all wept together and went on, and, guarded by the glorious master, we arrived at his church.… The third night after arriving at the holy church we planned to keep watch and did so. In the morning when the bell for matins rang, we returned to our lodging and going to bed we slept until nearly the second hour. Then I woke up and found that all weakness and pain were gone and I had recovered my former health, and I gladly called my usual attendant to wait on me.… And I shall not forget to say that after forty days that one was the first on which I took pleasure in drinking wine, since because of my illness I detested it until then.
(Ibid., Book II, Ch. 1)
In the second month after my ordination, when I was at a country place, I suffered from dysentery and high fever and began to be so ill that I altogether despaired of living. Everything that I could eat was always vomited before it had been digested and I loathed food, and when my stomach had no more strength as a result of no food the fever was the only thing that gave me strength; I could in no way take anything substantial and strengthening. I had severe pain, too, that darted all through my stomach and went down into my bowels, exhausting me by its pain no less than the fever had done. And when I was in such a condition that no hope of life was left and everything was being made ready for my death and the physician’s medicine could do nothing for one whom death had laid claim to, I was in despair and called the chief physician Armentarius and said to him: “You have used every trick of your profession, you have tried the power of all your remedies, but secular means are of no avail to the perishing. There is only one thing left for me to do. I will show you a great remedy:95 let them bring dust from the holy master’s tomb and make a potion for me from it. And if this does not cure me, every means of escape is lost.” Then the deacon was sent to the tomb of the holy bishop just mentioned and he brought the sacred dust and put it in water and gave me a drink of it. When I had drunk, soon all pain was gone and I received health from the tomb. And the benefit was so immediate that although this happened in the third hour, I became quite well and went to dinner that very day at the sixth hour.96
(Ibid., Book III, Preface and Ch. 1)
… Whenever headache comes on or a throbbing in the temples or a dulness of hearing or a dimness of sight or a pain attacks some other part, I am cured at once when I have touched the affected part on the tomb or the curtain hanging before it, and I wonder within myself that at the very touch the pain is immediately gone.
I shall place first in this book a miracle that I experienced recently. We were sitting at dinner after a fast and eating, when a fish was served. The sign of the cross of the Lord was made over it, but as we ate, a bone from this very fish stuck in my throat most painfully. It caused me great distress, for the point was fastened in my throat and its length blocked the passage. It prevented my speaking and kept the saliva which comes frequently from the palate, from passing. On the third day, when I could get rid of it neither by coughing or hawking, I resorted to my usual resource. I went to the tomb and prostrated myself on the pavement and wept abundantly and groaned and begged the confessor’s aid. Then I rose and touched the full length of my throat and all my head with the curtain. I was immediately cured and before leaving the holy threshold I was rid of all uneasiness. What became of the unlucky bone I do not know. I did not cough it up nor feel it go down into my stomach. One thing only I know, that I so quickly perceived that I was cured that I thought that some one had put in his hand and pulled out the bone that hurt my throat.
A Phantom Attacks a Woman
(Ibid., Book III, Ch. 37)
At this time when a certain woman remained alone at the loom when the others had gone, a most frightful phantom appeared as she sat, and laid hold of the woman and began to drag her off. She screamed and wept since she saw there was no one to help, but still tried to make a courageous resistance. After two or three hours the other women returned and found her lying on the ground half dead and unable to speak. Still she made signs with her hand, but they did not understand and she continued speechless. The phantom which had appeared to her attacked so many persons in that house that they left it and went elsewhere. In two or three months’ time the woman came to the church and had the merit to recover her speech. And so she told with her own lips what she had endured.
Procedure in Case of a Miracle
(Ibid., Book III, ch. 45)
The facts that I relate ought not to seem to any one unworthy of belief, because the names of individuals are not mentioned in the account. The cause of it is this: when they are restored to health by the saint of God, they leave immediately, and they sometimes go so secretly that, so to speak, they are noticed by no one. And when the report has spread that a miracle has been done by the blessed bishop, I summon those who have charge of the church and inquire into what has happened; but I do not always learn the names from them. I generally tell by name of those I have been able to see or examine personally.
Minor Miracles Worked on Gregory
(Ibid., Book IV, Ch. 2)
At one time my tongue became uncomfortably swelled up, so that when I wished to speak it usually made me stutter, which was somewhat unseemly. I went to the saint’s tomb and drew my awkward tongue along the wooden lattice. The swelling went down at once and I became well. It was a serious swelling and filled the cavity where the palate is. Then three days later my lip began to have a painful beating in it. I went again to the tomb to get help and when I had touched my lip to the hanging curtain the pulsation stopped at once. And I suppose this came from an over abundance of blood; still trusting to the saint’s power I did not try to lessen the [amount of] blood and this matter caused me no further trouble.
Gregory’s Uncle, St. Gall
(The Lives of the Fathers, Ch. 6)
St. Gall was a servant of God from his youth up, loving the Lord with his whole heart, and he loved what he knew to be beloved by God. His father was named Georgius and his mother Leocadia, a descendant of Vectius Epagatus who, as the history of Eusebius relates, was a martyr at Lyons. They belonged among the leading senators so that no family could be found in the Gauls better born or nobler. And although Gall’s father wished to ask for a certain senator’s daughter for him, he took a single attendant and went to the monastery at Cournon, six miles from Clermont, and besought the abbot to consent to give him the tonsure. The abbot noticed the good sense and fine bearing of the youth and inquired his name, his family and native place. He replied that he was called Gall and was a citizen of Auvergne, a son of the senator Georgius. When the abbot learned that he belonged to one of the first families, he said: “My son, what you wish is good, but you must first bring it to your father’s attention and if he gives his consent, I will do what you ask.” Then the abbot sent messengers in regard to this matter to his father, asking what he wished to be done with the youth. The father was a little disappointed, but said: “He is my oldest son and I therefore wished him to marry, but if the Lord deigns to receive him into His service, let His will rather than mine be done.” And he added: “Consent to the child’s request which he made by God’s inspiration.”
2. The abbot on receiving this message made him a clerk. He was very chaste and as if already old he had no wicked desires: he refrained from a young man’s mirth; he had a voice wonderfully sweet and melodious; he devoted himself constantly to reading; he took pleasure in fasting and was very abstemious. When the blessed bishop Quintian came to this monastery and heard him sing, he did not allow him to stay there any longer, but took him to the city and, like the heavenly father, fed him on the sweetness of the spirit. On his father’s death, when his voice was improving day by day and he was a great favorite among the people, they reported this to king Theodoric, who at once sent for him and showed him such affection that he loved him more than his own son; he was loved by the queen with a similar love, not only for his beautiful voice, but also for his chastity. At that time king Theodoric had taken many clerks from Auvergne whom he ordered to serve God in the church at Trèves; but he never allowed the blessed Gall to be separated from him. So it came that when the king went to Cologne, he went with him. There was there a heathen temple full of various articles of worship where the neighboring barbarians used to make offerings and stuff themselves with food and drink until they vomited; there also they worshipped images as god, and carved limbs in wood, each one the limb in which he had suffered pain. When the holy Gall heard of this, he hastened to the place with only one clerk when none of the benighted pagans was present, and set it on fire. And they saw the smoke of the fire rolling up to the sky and searched for the one who had set it, and found him and pursued him sword in hand. He fled and took refuge in the king’s court. But when the king had learned from the pagans’ threats what had been done, he pacified them with agreeable words and so calmed their furious rage. The blessed man would often weep in telling this story, and say: “Unhappy me that I did not stand my ground and let my life be ended in this affair.”97 He was deacon at the time.…
3. Later when the blessed bishop Quintian passed from this world by God’s command, the holy Gall was living in Clermont, and the people of the city assembled at the house of the priest Inpetratus, Gall’s uncle on his mother’s side, lamenting at the bishop’s death and asking who should be appointed in his place. After long debate they returned each to his own house. On their departure the holy Gall called one of the clerks and said, the holy spirit rushing into him: “What are these people muttering about? Why are they running to and fro? What are they debating? They are wasting their time,” said he. “I am going to be bishop; the Lord will deign to bestow this honor on me. Now when you hear that I am returning from the king’s presence, take my predecessor’s horse with the saddle on him and come and bring him to me. If you refuse to obey me, take care you are not sorry for it later.” As he said this, he was lying on his bed. The clerk was angry at him and abused him and struck him on the side, breaking the bed at the same time, and went off in a rage. On his departure the priest Inpetratus said to the blessed Gall: “My son, hear my advice: don’t waste a minute, but go to the king and tell him what has happened here, and if the Lord inspires him to bestow this holy office on you, I shall give thanks to God; otherwise you can at least recommend yourself to the man who is appointed.” He went and reported to the king what had happened.…
And the clerks of Clermont, with the choice of the foolish, went to the king with many gifts. Even then that seed of iniquity had begun to germinate, that bishoprics were sold by kings and bought by the clerks. Then they heard from the king that they were going to have St. Gall as bishop. He was ordained priest and the king gave orders to invite the citizens to a feast at the expense of the treasury and to make merry over the promotion of Gall the future bishop. This was done. He was in the habit of telling that he had given no more for the office of bishop than a third of a gold piece which he had given to the cook who prepared the feast. Then the king appointed two bishops to accompany him to Clermont. And the clerk, Viventius by name, who had struck him on the side when he was in bed, hastened to meet the bishop according to his command, but not without great shame, and he presented himself and the horse which Gall had ordered. When they had gone into the bath together, Gall gently reproached him for the pain in his side which he had incurred from the contemptuous violence of the clerk, and he caused him great shame, not in a spirit of anger, however, but only delighting in a pious joke. After that he was received into the city with much singing and was ordained bishop in his own church.
Footnotes
83 The following brief selections serve to illustrate Gregory’s personality and point of view.
84 Gregory then goes on to show that the miracles of the saints replace for him the wonders and feats of antique mythology.
85 Theodobert I, 534-548.
86 One of the most fertile spots in France. Cf. Lavisse, Histoire de France, I, pp. 296-301.
87 “Insequitur clamor virorum strepitusque mulierum, ululatus infantum,”—a reminiscence of Vergil, Aen. I, 87, “Insequitur clamorque virum stridorque rudentum.”
88 The vessel used for the purpose indicated here, the “monstrance,” was in the shape of a tower. Cf. DuCange, art. Turris.
89 The identification of flies with demons occurs also on page 237. For a similar case of disinclination to let a fly settle on a wine cup see Frazer, The Golden Bough, 8, 291.
90 Cf. p. 58. This punishment of Auvergne took place in 532, 6 years before Gregory’s birth.
91 The site of St. Julian’s church. Brioude is situated about 40 miles up the valley of the Allier from Clermont.
92 Gregory’s confessions of inability to write in a polished style, though probably hypocritical, are nevertheless in accordance with fact.
93 Gregory’s interest in this miracle is one of technique. As a rule material “touch” of the source of “virtue” was regarded as a necessity, but “mere invocation” was sometimes effective. The cure that is related is an extreme form of the latter. See Introd. xx, xxi.
94 See Bonnet, p. 272, Note 3.
95 Tyriaca for theriaca, (a) antidote against the bite of serpents, (b) remedy in general.
96 Noon.
97 Gall would in that case have been a martyr with all a martyr’s advantages. He does not regret running away as an act of prudence, but as an injudicious act spiritually speaking. Cf. Marignan, Le culte des saints sous les Mérovingiens (Paris, 1899), ch. 1.
Notes
A P. 1, l. 21 f. Gregory’s vague idea of a symmetrical chronological development of history leading up to a great termination, namely, “the approaching end of the world,” finds expression in a number of passages; cf. pp. 5, 6, 7, 105, 208, 244. It is a peculiar fact that the chronological tastes of the Christian historiographers and theologians were largely due to their interest in the future, which was as definitely marked out as the past by the Providence of God.
B P. 5, l. 1 f. Here as well as in his “first preface” (p. 1) Gregory gives his point of view as definitely as any historian has ever done. The reader has merely to bear it in mind in order to interpret the narrative. Gregory’s impulse to write the History of the Franks came not from an interest in the Frankish state, but from an interest in the orthodox church, of which he regarded the Franks as the champions. It is for this reason that he is far more definite in expressing his adherence to the creed than his allegiance to the Frankish kings. It is this attitude, too, that explains his impatience with civil war (p. 105). Cf. Introd., p. xxi and pp. 53, 54.
C P. 6, l. 36 f. Gregory’s references to his sources are relatively clear in Book I and can be traced through the succeeding chapters. The main source is naturally Jerome’s translation of Eusebius’ chronicle supplemented by Orosius’ History Against the Pagans. He also uses Rufinus’ translation and continuation of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History. On these sources see other volumes of the Records of Civilization.
D P. 9, l. 1. The stade was 606 ft. 9 in. in length. It took about 8⅔ stades to make an English mile.
E P. 9, l. 2. Agripennis (arapennis, arpent), properly a measure of surface. Here it is used of length, just as American farmers use the term, acre, as a measure both of surface and of length, meaning in the latter case the side of a square acre—about 70 yards. That this is the usage here may be proved by a simple arithmetical operation.
F P. 10, l. 12 f. For other exhibitions of extreme credulity, see pp. 68, 171. It should be remembered that in these cases the point is that Gregory is applying his theory of life to a concrete situation in such a way that the contrast between the modern attitude and that of the dark ages is brought out strongly. His view of the material world was not one that laid any stress upon natural cause and effect, but rather upon supernatural cause and natural effect. It is in Gregory’s favor that he hears of more remarkable miracles than he sees.
G P. 11. Chapters 11-26 and 18-29 have been summarized. They contain nothing of importance and their inclusion in full would be solely at the expense of the reader’s patience.
H P. 12, l. 11. 251 A.D.
I P. 12, l. 16 f. Dionysius had the advantage, not apparent until long after his lifetime, of being sent to Paris. His cult rose with the city and he became the patron saint of France, his worship centering in the abbey of St. Denis, founded within half a century of Gregory’s death. In the ninth century St. Denis was boldly identified with Dionysius the Areopagite and with the mystical theological writings mistakenly attributed to the latter. This identification affected the development of French theological thinking for eight centuries. See Molinier, Sources de l’Histoire de France, Nos. 65, 816.
J P. 14, l. 1. The reference is to the temple built in honor of Mercurius Dumias (Mercury of the Dôme) on Puy-de-Dôme, the dominating peak among the mountains about Gregory’s native place. He had no doubt frequently visited it. For the term Vasso Galatae, see Art., Vassocaletis in Alt-Celtischer Sprachschatz, edited by A. Hohler.
K P. 15, l. 3. Cf. note to p. 6.
L P. 16, l. 4. St. Martin died in 397. His fame in later ages is largely due to the life written about 400 by his disciple Sulpicius Severus. This work had a large circulation in Gaul and became a model for saints’ lives. It is full of miracles and Gregory’s Miracles of St. Martin is merely a continuation of it. The best edition of Severus’ works is by Hahn, Vienna, 1866.
M P. 16, l. 38. For a similar case of “taboo of the threshold,” see p. 200. The custom of taking a corpse out by some other opening than the ordinary door is widely spread among primitive peoples. Cf. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, edited by J. Hastings, Art., Death.
N P. 21, l. 28. Cf. Notes on p. 6, l. 36 and p. 16, l. 4. Sulpicius Severus wrote also an epitome of sacred history from the creation of the world down to 400 A.D. The best edition is La Chronique de Sulpice Sévère, by A. Lavertrujon, Paris, 1896.
O P. 21, c. 1. The source of the story of Bricius is unknown. A Brictio, described as a man of bad character, is mentioned by Sulpicius Severus (Dialogi, 3) and by Venantius Fortunatus.
P P. 24, l. 4. The Vandals invaded Gaul in 406 and moved on to Spain in 409 and across to Africa in 427 or 428.
Q P. 24, l. 7 f. The conception of war at this time was largely that the side with the strongest supernatural backing would win. As the supernatural forces on each side could be tested easily by a battle of champions, it was natural that this should be resorted to occasionally, at least in legend. Cf. Introd., p. xxiv. See also p. 230.
R P. 26, l. 1. To Gregory’s mind the burning of the city of Metz was of interest mainly because it brought out this conclusion. See also l. 37 below.
S P. 27, c. 9. The historians, Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus and Sulpicius Alexander, are known only by the quotations given here. The elaborate method of citing authorities found in this chapter does not occur anywhere else in the History of the Franks.
T P. 31, l. 23. In consolaribus legimus. Nothing further is known of this source. If the following sentences are also drawn from it, it is plain that its writer speaks as one living to the north of the Loire before the conquest of that country by the Franks. Monod, Sources de l’histoire mérovingienne, p. 85.
U P. 33, c. 14-16. For Merovingian church architecture see Enlart, Archéologie française, vol. 1, ch. 2. No trace of the churches mentioned by Gregory survives.
V P. 36, c. 22. Sidonius Apollinaris (d. 480), the leading literary man of his time in Gaul, was bishop of Clermont the last ten years of his life. Gregory’s work on the masses written by him is lost. Although Gregory was born more than fifty years after Sidonius’ death, he speaks in this intimate way of the former bishop of the place of his birth. On Sidonius see Dill, Society in the Last Century of the Roman Empire, c. iv. Sidonius’ Letters have just been translated by R. M. Dalton, Oxford, 1915.
W P. 36, c. 27 f. For an acute analysis of the literary and oral origins of Gregory’s account of Clovis, see Kurth, Les sources de l’histoire de Clovis (Revue des quest. hist., 1888).
X P. 37, l. 33. Campus Martius. The March-field, later changed to the May-field, campus Madius, the annual assembly of the Franks.
Y P. 41, l. 8. Sigamber, one of the Sigambri, a German tribe forming a section of the Frankish people.
Z P. 41, l. 16. From the number Gregory reports as having been baptized, possibly an exaggeration in itself, we can see that Clovis’ army was relatively small.
AA P. 44, l. 8. The Lex Gundobada, still in existence (Mon. Germ. Hist., Legum, Sect. I, Legum Nationum Germ. tomi II, pars 1), is a codification of Burgundian custom. Gundobad also issued a code for his Roman subjects. The object of his legislation was largely to secure a better understanding between Romans and Burgundians. Cf. Lavisse, Histoire de France, II, p. 88 f. For bibliographical references see R. Schroeder, Lehrbuch der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte (1902), p. 241.
AB P. 45, l. 4. See Introduction, pp. xviii and xxii.
AC P. 46, l. 35 f. The battle of Vouillé was fought in 507. The people of Auvergne, led by Apollinaris, son of Sidonius Apollinaris (p. 36), fought on the side of the Visigoths.
AD P. 47, l. 29. Et ab ea die tanquam consul aut Augustus est vocitatus. The opinion is held that it was an honorary consulship to which Clovis was appointed. Cf. Pfister, in Cambridge Mediaeval History, vol. II, p. 115.
AE P. 49, l. 29 f. Cf. p. 50, l. 17 f. According to the description of Clovis he was entirely emancipated from the clan morality which was so powerful among the Franks of his time.
AF P. 53, l. 36. The case of Gundobad is hardly to the point, since he enjoyed a long and prosperous reign and left his kingdom to his son Sigismund. See also note on p. 44.
AG P. 54, l. 6 f. For a map showing this division see Longnon’s Atlas. Theodoric had his capital at Rheims and held Auvergne, Clodomer held Tours and Poitiers and made Orleans his capital. Childebert had Paris, and Clothar, Soissons, for his capital. Note that all divided equally, Theodoric the son of a concubine (p. 38) with the rest.
AH P. 54, l. 22. Theodoric the Great, king of the Ostrogoths (475-526).
AI P. 55, l. 13 f. See p. 38.
AJ P. 56, l. 21. Cf. p. 54. Hermenfred had “forgotten” to reward Theodoric. The atrocities of the Thuringians are mentioned only here.
AK P. 57, l. 3. Ecce verbum directum habemus. Cf. p. 84, l. 8, Verbum enim directum non habemus. The verbum directum was not justification to public opinion but to the supernatural powers. Cf. p. 45, 4 f. and Introd. pp. xxiv-xxv.
AL P. 59, l. 2. Vitry in Champagne.
AM P. 60, c. 15. This story is from Gregory’s family tradition. The bishop of Langres was Gregory’s great-grandfather and Attalus was a relative. Trèves was in Theodoric’s territory (Longnon, p. 368), so that Attalus must have been a hostage from Childebert. However, Longnon (p. 209) gives reasons for the opinion that Langres also belonged to Theodoric. In that case Attalus must have belonged to some other city and must have gone to Gregory merely for protection. For a contrary opinion see Bonnell, Die Anfänge des Karolingischen Hauses, p. 204, Note 2.
AN P. 60, l. 11. Note the use of the term barbarian (barbarus) for Frank. See also p. 94, c. 35.
AO P. 62, l. 8. Arndt remarks that the Meuse should certainly have been named in this passage rather than the Moselle. The latter, however, is the reading of all the Mss.
AP P. 64, l. 9. The Frankish kings were “long-haired” (reges crinitos) (p. 31). The alternative offered to queen Clotilda was to countenance the degradation of her grandchildren from royal rank or “to see them dead.”
AQ P. 66, l. 7. The relation of godfather to godson was regarded as of great importance. See e.g. p. 179, l. 10.
AR P. 66, l. 13. Arles was probably taken by Theodobert about 534 and remained only a short time in his hands. Longnon, p. 434.
AS P. 67, l. 33. For the “fast of the Ninevites,” see Jonah 3, 5.
AT P. 70, c. 34. Professor J. W. Thompson (Commerce of France in the Ninth Century, Journal of Political Economy, November, 1915, pp. 876-7) regards this merchant group as probably going back to a Roman mercantile corporation. He is in error however in supposing that the merchants lent money to the king on the occasion Gregory refers to.
AU P. 70, c. 36. The Franks objected to being taxed not only because they were originally tax-free, but because the payment of taxes degraded them by placing them on a level with the conquered Gallo-Romans. This explains the bitterness of the enmity to Parthenius (cf. p. 177), who may be judged from other references to him as a man intellectually at least much superior to the environment he found in Theodobert’s kingdom. See S. Hellman’s revision of Giesebrecht’s translation of the History of the Franks, vol. 3, p. 169.
AV P. 75, c. 2. Elsewhere (p. 220) we learn that Clothar recognized the right not only of the clergy but of the people of Tours to go tax-free. The story told in this chapter would indicate that the bishop of Tours was the natural leader of the bishops of Clothar’s kingdom. Cf. Introd., p. x.
AW P. 76, l. 30-31. The meaning is that the native rulers remained, there being a difference only in title.
AX P. 77, c. 6. The principle that the king’s consent was necessary to the choice of a bishop was just being established at this time. The bishops seeing in this case what they thought a good opportunity, wished to disregard it, but Cato would not consent to the scheme, believing that the king’s consent was demanded by the canons. Gregory appears to have sympathized strongly with the effort of the bishops. The selection of Cautinus in the way described was even more irregular than the proposed consecration of Cato.
AY P. 78, l. 31. Theodovald reigned 548-555.
AZ P. 82, l. 8. Cautinus was illiterate. Cf. Introd., p. xiii.
BA P. 82, c. 13. Chramnus’ stay at Clermont must have come soon after king Theodovald’s death (555). At this time Gregory would be seventeen or eighteen years old.
BB P. 82, l. 11 f. Brioude was about 40 miles from Clermont up the valley of the Allier. In it was St. Julian’s church.
BC P. 82, l. 30. Note the use of the term rex as applied to Chramnus, who was merely an heir of king Clothar. So regina is applied to a king’s daughter (p. 138, l. 35).
BD P. 83, l. 16. Sallust, Catilina, c. 3. Note this apt citation.
BE P. 83, l. 23. It was the custom for the Frankish king on his accession to make a circuit of his kingdom and receive the allegiance of his people. Cf. pp. 174, 220.
BF P. 84, l. 37. Prima haec est et magna generatio. Gregory’s mother’s family. Introd., pp. xi-xii.
BG P. 85, l. 27 f. For St. Martin’s church see pp. 33-34, and for the cathedral church, p. 247.
BH P. 86, l. 33. “Alas!” is a weak translation of the ejaculation, Wa!
BI P. 87, l. 7. “In the kingdom of Burgundy we find the title patricius as that of an official who governed the part of Provence which was attached to Burgundy and also appears to have held the chief military command in that kingdom,” Pfister in Cambridge Medieval History, II, p. 137.
BJ P. 91, l. 10. Gaganus (Khan), not a proper name.
BK P. 93, l. 34. Cf. Gregory’s own experience to illustrate this, Introd., pp. xi-xii, xx.
BL P. 95, c. 40. This chapter, summarized because outside of the main interest of the narrative, has been examined as a test of Gregory’s information as to the Eastern empire. The information is found valuable though not exact. A. Carrière in Annuaire de l’école pratique des hautes études, 1898.
BM P. 95, c. 41. The Lombards entered Italy from the northeast in 568. Their first invasion of Gaul from Italy and the defeat of the patrician Amatus took place in 569. The most complete account of these events is given by Paul the Deacon, Historia Langobardorum, Lib. II, edition by Bethmann und Waitz (Mon. Germ. Hist.), 1878.
BN P. 96, l. 31. The Saxons had accompanied the Lombards in their original invasion of Italy. They were now proposing to return to their former homes by another route.
BO P. 98, l. 6. Ex hoc quasi honoratus habitus. “Being regarded in consequence of this as in a sense honoratus.” Honoratus here seems to be used in a general meaning rather than in the technical one of a man who holds or has held high office. Cf. Du Cange, Art., Honorati.
BP P. 98, l. 14. Verg. Aen. III, 56, 57.
BQ P. 98, l. 17. Judex loci. The vicarius or subordinate of the Count.
BR P. 99, l. 29. This omen pointed to Sigibert’s death.
BS P. 100, l. 20 f. The idea of conveying property by will was foreign to the Franks and was not received into their law, which regarded the family rather than the individual. On the other hand conveying property by will was a regular practice among the Gallo-Roman population. The church was often made a legatee, a practice due in part to the desire to have its interest involved in the carrying out of the will. Therefore in the conflicts that arose in regard to succession to property the interests of the church and of the state were naturally opposed.
BT P. 105, l. 35. Orosius, V, 8.
BU P. 106, l. 13. After Clothar’s death in 561 Charibert I became master of Tours. When he died in 567 Tours was allotted to Sigibert, who had however to drive Clovis, son of Chilperic, away before he took possession. In 573 Chilperic again took possession but was obliged to retire. Sigibert then held the city until his death in 575, after which Chilperic took it and held it to 584, when it passed into the hands of Gunthram and after three years, by the treaty of Andelot, into those of Childebert II.
BV P. 106, l. 15. Merovech’s mother was Audovera (p. 90).
BW P. 108, l. 9. Theodobert, son of Chilperic and Audovera. Gregory tells us nothing of the manner of his death. Cf. pp. 90, 114-118.
BX P. 108, l. 21. The nails were probably large spikes. Iron was scarce and the people of Mans could make use of it in many ways, especially for making knives. It may be remembered in this connection how the barbarians tore out the clamps which the Roman masons used to hold the stones together, as in the case of the Porta Nigra at Trèves.
BY P. 108, l. 31. St. Martin’s church was “550 paces” from the city of Tours (p. 36). Each of these “paces” is 4 ft. 10.248 in. and the whole distance slightly over half a mile.
BZ P. 108, l. 25. Regio morbo, jaundice.
CA P. 109, l. 3 f. Felix was bishop of Nantes from 549 to 583. He was the builder of a large church and undertook embankment improvements on the Loire in Nantes. His relations with Gregory appear to have been usually bad. Cf. pp. 76, 154-5. For poems addressed to Felix by Fortunatus see Carmina, III, 4-10; V, 7 (edition by Leo in Mon. Germ. Hist.).
CB P. 109, l. 11. Tetricus died in 572. It was in 573 that Gregory became bishop of Tours.
CC P. 109, l. 21. Creditor, business agent.
CD P. 109, l. 21. It is of interest that Gregory’s own brother was accused of the practice of “evil arts” (maleficiis). Cf. Introd., p. xix.
CE P. 110, l. 6. Probably Alais. This bishopric probably became part of that of Nîmes. Longnon, pp. 538-543.
CF P. 111, l. 38. Libri IV de Virtutibus S. Martini. See Introd., pp. xvi and pp. 254-260.
CG P. 112, l. 32 f. This tale indicates one kind of limitation under which the profession of medicine labored at this time. Another is revealed in the tales of healing undertaken in connection with “evil arts” (pp. 205-8, 236-8). In the light of these passages the fate of the physician Marileif (pp. 115, 181-2) is the natural one. See also p. 131 and Introd., pp. xxii-xxiii.
CH P. 113, l. 3. A characteristic opinion. See Introd., pp. xvii-xviii.
CI P. 116, l. 15. “On its right bank” (in dextera eius parte). Tours was wholly on the left bank of the Loire.
CJ P. 116, l. 22. Cf. Introd., p. xix.
CK P. 116, l. 28. Note the terms of the prophecy and the statement that it was fulfilled. Chilperic was, however, succeeded by his son Clothar, who outlived Gregory. The doubts expressed as to Clothar’s legitimacy may have been inspired by this prophecy. See S. Hellman, in Hist. Zeit. vol. 107, p. 27 f.
CL P. 117, l. 1 f. For another glimpse of Frankish hunting see p. 235.
CM P. 118, l. 18. This is the earliest occurrence of the word Austrasii. Longnon, p. 193.
CN P. 119, l. 4. A more or less general custom among the early Germans, described by Tacitus, Germania, 31.
CO P. 119, c. 15. Chilperic’s enmity to Praetextatus, bishop of Rouen, arose from the latter’s favor for Merovech, Chilperic’s rebellious son. It was at Rouen that Merovech married Brunhilda. The legal side of the trial is hard to follow, the main interest lying in Gregory’s spirited resistance to Chilperic. How Chilperic would have described it might be another story.
CP P. 120, l. 29 f. From Sulpicius Severus’ life of St. Martin. See note on p. 16, l. 4.
CQ P. 127, l. 4 f. The boys were to die in fulfilment of the prophecy on p. 116. See also p. 141.
CR P. 128, l. 2. Chilpericus … bannos jussit exigi. Bannus here means the fine for failure to obey the king’s ban (order) requiring the service of all inhabitants. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, vol. II, 1, p. 34.
CS P. 128, l. 11. The term translated “acre” (arapennis) is in reality only five-sixteenths of an acre. This part of Chilperic’s decree must refer only to vineyard land.
CT P. 129, l. 33 f. The reference may be to children of Gregory’s niece who lived at Tours. Cf. p. 115.
CU P. 131, l. 16. Gregory’s comment has provoked discussion. It should be borne in mind that to Gregory the keeping of an oath was an essential, that his attitude toward practitioners of medicine was hostile, and that Gunthram was a favorite.
CV P. 132, l. 24. Hilarius of Poitiers and Eusebius of Vercellae (Liber in Gloria Confessorum, 2, 3), two champions of orthodoxy.
CW P. 133, l. 8. Sedulius (first half of the fifth century), a Christian poet who composed a metrical account of Biblical history.
CX P. 133, l. 12. This passage may be taken for evidence that Gregory did not know the Greek alphabet.
CY P. 133, l. 28. The mayor of the palace was regularly tutor (nutricius) of a king under age. Pfister in Cambridge Medieval History, vol. II, p. 136.
CZ P. 135, l. 8. See note on p. 106.
DA P. 138, l. 11. The church of St. Medard at Soissons. Braine is a short distance away.
DB P. 138, l. 35. Perhaps Riguntha, daughter of Chilperic and Fredegunda, sympathized with Gregory out of enmity for her mother. Cf. p. 221.
DC P. 140, l. 6. We hear of this local jealousy between Clermont and Tours also at p. 137; another more serious inter-city feud is described on p. 172.
DD P. 148, l. 4. The recluse Hospicius had had himself immured in a tower. He had a window in it, but the only way to gain access to him was to take off the roof. For other recluses see pp. 151, 158, 199.
DE P. 150, l. 11 f. The interpretation of this passage is that the worms were demons or sent by demons to plague the holy man.
DF P. 152, l. 11. Inter senatores sophisticos ac judices philosophicos. This passage illustrates the difference in culture at this time between Paris and southern Gaul.
DG P. 152, l. 22. The earliest mention of the office. In Gregory’s time the major domo was of domestic rather than of political importance. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte (1892), vol. II, p. 104.
DH P. 154, l. 2. For another observation of a comet, see p. 92.
DI P. 158, l. 8. Gundulf is a great-uncle of Gregory on his mother’s side. Hist. Franc. VI, 11. It is worth while remarking that he has a barbarian name. Gregory had found it convenient to discard his own name for one more closely associated with the episcopal office, and Gundulf on his side may have had a similar motive.
DJ P. 158, c. 27. This agreement is referred to on p. 173 also. It was made by Chilperic, Gunthrum, and Sigibert in dividing the kingdom of Charibert in 567. Longnon, pp. 348-353.
DK P. 159, l. 1. In the division of Frankish territory following Clothar’s death, the territory of Marseilles was divided between Gunthram and Sigibert. When Sigibert died, Gunthram took the whole. Childebert II is here claiming his father’s share.
DL P. 159, l. 7. Gregory attributes the assassination of Sigibert to Fredegunda (p. 100).
DM P. 159, l. 17. Bourges belonged to Gunthram; Tours, Poitiers, Angers, Nantes, to Chilperic.
DN P. 162, l. 15. The Mummolus mentioned here is a different person from Mummolus the patrician. See Index.
DO P. 162, l. 26. Gregory’s attitude toward the story in general is not skeptical; but he regarded the diabolical powers as always deceitful. Cf. p. 116: “What the devil promises is not to be believed.”
DP P. 163, l. 29. To take Riguntha as bride of the king of Spain.
DQ P. 164, l. 29. This should be regarded as a tax rather than as a free-will offering. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, vol. II, p. 70.
DR P. 166, l. 3. See note on p. 133.
DS P. 169, l. 30. Nimia excesus abstinentia. The translation of these words is difficult. Excesus may be taken as excisus (ex, caedere). Caedere is frequently used in Gregory’s writings in the sense of flog. The compound however does not appear to be found elsewhere in Gregory, and Bonnet, p. 422, note 1, suggests for excesus, exesus (devoured, consumed), which however does not give a plausible meaning.
DT P. 170, l. 1. Eoglogias (eulogiae). Blessed or consecrated bread, not the eucharist. Bingham, Christian Antiquities, vol. V, 186 f.
DU P. 171, l. 32. Sallust, Catilina, c. 3.
DV P. 173, l. 12 f. See pp. 119, 145.
DW P. 175, l. 13. Duke Desiderius had been in the service of Chilperic; he now joined the pretender Gundovald.
DX P. 175, l. 30. The occasion is described on pp. 158-160.
DY P. 175, c. 14. This chapter furnishes a good example of the way in which their “sacred character” protected legates. The outward symbol of this “character” was a “consecrated wand.” Hist. Franc. VII, 32.
DZ P. 176, l. 11. Du Cange defines Ballomer as falsus dominus, pseudo-princeps. It is regarded as a word of Frankish origin with termination in -mer, like Clodomer.
EA P. 177, l. 9 f. The meaning of this probably is that Leonard was stripped of the insignia of office which he had retained. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, vol. II, p. 81, Note.
EB P. 178, l. 18. Gunthram appears here more as the avenger of his kinsman according to the old custom than as king with a new order of justice at his hand. Cf. Brunner, vol. I, p. 325 (edition of 1906).
EC P. 178, l. 35. The reference is probably to the estates granted (commendatum) to him by the king.
ED P. 181, l. 9. The vicar (also tribunus, judex loci) was an officer subordinate to the count. Injuriosus had been obliged to borrow money, having either failed to collect the taxes in full or spent the money otherwise.
EE P. 182, c. 29. The interest of this chapter lies in the vivid manner in which the fear of St. Martin is depicted as a present reality to the people of the time. A Frank named Claudius was commissioned by king Gunthram to destroy Eberulf, a political refugee, without violating St. Martin’s sanctuary. “As he travelled along [to Tours] Claudius, according to the custom of the barbarians, began to watch the signs and say they were unfavorable to him, and at the same time to ask many persons if the power of the blessed Martin was shown at the present time on those who broke faith; he particularly wanted to know whether St. Martin’s vengeance followed immediately in case any one attacked persons who put their faith in him.” On arriving at Tours Claudius ingratiated himself with Eberulf and promised him help, and when the latter “saw that Claudius made such promises on oath in the very church and at its entrance and in every part of the court-yard [atrium], the ill-fated man believed the perjurer.” The next day a feast was held in the church and Claudius secured Eberulf’s confidence to such a degree that the latter relaxed his guard. “He sent his men one after another to get strong wine, Italian wine, of course, and Syrian wine.” This took place in the courtyard of the church. Claudius was now in a dilemma. “He was purposing to kill Eberulf in the courtyard, but he was afraid of the power of the holy bishop.” However, the chance was too good to be lost. Eberulf was slain by Claudius and his men, but Eberulf’s followers immediately appeared and there was a fierce battle in and about the monastery in the courtyard. “The poor, both those who received the regular doles, and others” took part. “Those who were ’possessed’ and the beggars hurried from here and there with stones and clubs to avenge the insult done to the church.” Claudius and his men were all slain. Thus “the vengeance of God had immediately overtaken the men who had polluted the holy courtyard with human blood. Moreover, Eberulf’s wickedness is perceived to be not slight when the blessed bishop (Martin) allowed him to meet such a fate.” The whole incident was regarded by Gregory, who was absent at the time “at a country place about thirty miles from the city,” as a vindication of St. Martin.
EF P. 184, l. 21. For an account of the arms and armor of the period see L. Beck, Geschichte des Eisens, vol. I, pp. 703-728 (1884).
EG P. 186, c. 47. This feud, the sequel of which is given in Book IX, c. 19, is of some interest in the study of the criminal law of the period, but is told by Gregory in a somewhat tangled way, so that it seems best to summarize the main points in a note. A company who were celebrating Christmas were invited by a priest “to go to his house, to drink.” Evidently they had been drinking too much already, for one of them, Austrighysel, drew his sword and killed the priest’s slave who brought the message. Thereupon the feud began. Another of the company, Sichar, “who was on terms of friendship with the priest,” attacked Austrighysel at the church door, but the latter was forewarned and his party, killing Sichar’s servants, made off with his gold and silver and other property, Sichar himself escaping in the confusion. The case came before a court of citizens (in judicio civium) which gave judgment against Austrighysel, who was to pay the fine for homicide and for taking property without warrant. But Sichar, in the true spirit of a feudist, did not wait for this judgment. Learning where the property was kept, he took an armed band, murdered all in the house where the treasure was, and even carried off the flocks and herds. “On hearing this,” says Gregory, “we were greatly vexed and in conjunction with the judge we sent messengers to them to come to our presence and make a reasonable settlement and depart in peace, that the quarrel might not breed greater trouble.” Gregory even offered to advance the church’s money to pay the fine of the guilty one, if the latter had not money himself. But Chramsind, the representative of the family Sichar had murdered in the last incident, refused to accept settlement, and hearing later a false report that Sichar had been killed by one of his own slaves, he took up the feud anew, “summoned his kinsmen and friends,” plundered Sichar’s house, and killed all the slaves on his estate. The settlement of this tangled feud is extremely interesting, since it shows how the courts of the period were straining every effort to overcome the time-honored custom of the blood feud. “Then the two parties were summoned before the judge in the city and pleaded their causes, and the verdict was found by the judges that he [Chramsind] who had been unwilling to accept a money payment before and had burned the houses, should lose half of the award which [otherwise] would have been adjudged to him,—this was done contrary to the law if only peace could be restored—but Sichar was to pay the other half of the fine. Then the church gave money to the amount of the verdict; Sichar paid his fine and received a receipt for it, each party swearing to the other that at no time should one party go muttering things against the other. And thus the strife ended.” It did not end, however, as the nineteenth chapter of the ninth book shows.
EH P. 189, c. 1-7. For a discussion of Gregory’s attitude toward Gunthram see S. Hellmann, Studien zur mittelalterlichen Geschichtschreibung, Hist. Zeit., vol. 107, p. 23 f.
EI P. 189, l. 6. Gunthram was frequently threatened with assassination. See pp. 174, 176, 178, 205. On this occasion he seems to have felt more confidence.
EJ P. 189, l. 20. The Syrians were the distributors of eastern Mediterranean commodities in Gaul. The name seems to have been applied to a number of eastern peoples. In this connection it may be recalled that a Syrian, Eusebius, was bishop of Paris, and another, Theodore of Tarsus, archbishop of Canterbury.
EK P. 191, l. 1. Gunthram had held Saintes from 567 to 576, when it was taken from him by Chilperic’s son Clovis.
EL P. 197, l. 20. Daemonii meridiani instinctu. Cf. Interea accedentibus hariolis et dicentibus eum meridiani daemonii incursionem pati (De Virtut. S. Martin. IV, 36). A sudden seizure in the heat of the day would be diagnosed as possession by a mid-day demon.
EM P. 198, l. 22 f. See Frazer, Golden Bough, vol. 8, p. 280, for an explanation of this matter. An image of a noxious creature was supposed to rid a locality of it.
EN P. 206, l. 2. Errore nigromantici ingenii. The spelling of nigromantici reveals a popular etymology (niger), “the black art.” Cf. Bonnet, p. 218.
EO P. 207, l. 7. The “imposter” had to conduct a service containing responses all by himself.
EP P. 209, l. 34. The meaning of this is that in his pain and excitement Gunthram Boso thought he had a lance in his hand instead of a sword.
EQ P. 210, c. 15. This assembly of the Arian bishops of Spain took place in 587.
ER P. 211, l. 12. The reference is to the Latin version (and continuation) of Eusebius’ history by Rufinus. Book X, c. 14.
ES P. 212, l. 2. According to the Salic law the fine which the killing of a free man entailed was more than doubled if the corpse was concealed.
ET P. 212, l. 21. The purpose of the letter was to certify that Chramsind was not an outlaw and could not be attacked with impunity by Sichar’s kinsmen.
EU P. 212, l. 36. In the agreement there are two separate statements about Senlis, the first (p. 213, l. 34), that “Childebert asserts his right from the present day to two-thirds of Senlis,” the second (p. 215, l. 6), that “it is agreed that Childebert shall hold Senlis in entirety, and as far as the third therein due to lord Gunthram is concerned, he shall be compensated by the third belonging to lord Childebert which is in Ressons.”
EV P. 215, l. 9. Ressons-sur-le-Matz, not far from Senlis. Cf. Longnon, p. 416.
EW P. 216, l. 30. It was as the head of the Merovingian clan that Gunthram’s consent was required.
EX P. 216, l. 32. Ingunda had married Reccared’s elder brother who rebelled against his father and was finally executed. Ingunda died shortly after on her way to Constantinople.
EY P. 217, l. 1. Childebert had already made two expeditions against the Lombards. Cf. pp. 163, 197.
EZ P. 218, l. 10. The agreement was made Nov. 8, 588 at Andelot.
FA P. 218, l. 16. Gregory’s idea of a good king is that he approximates to a bishop. Cf. Introd., p. xvii.
FB P. 220, c. 30. This chapter contains the history of taxation in Tours in Gregory’s day. The exemption enjoyed by Tours must have brought it some rich inhabitants. On the other hand the fact that political refugees fled to St. Martin’s church for protection was sometimes a disadvantage. Cf. p. 117.
FC P. 221, l. 25. Genetricemque suam servitio redeberit. The translation of this passage is difficult. Bonnet, p. 668, note, suggests redhiberet for redeberit, in which case the meaning would be that Rigunda would make Fredegunda a slave again, as she had been before marrying Chilperic.
FG P. 222, l. 6. Wife of duke Launebod, who built the church of St. Saturninus at Toulouse.
FH P. 222, l. 8. For Waddo see pp. 165, 182-185. He had been count of Saintes, and it was probably from the territory of Saintes that he made this expedition.
FI P. 223, l. 11. The story of the forty nuns is told with burdensome detail. The sequel of the story with the review of the case by the bishops (Book X, Chaps. 15-17) is translated.
FJ P. 227, l. 16. Pope Gregory the Great, 590-604. This chapter gives the only contemporary information about him not given in his own writings.
FK P. 228, l. 10. Pope Gregory had lived in Constantinople from 579 to 585.
FL P. 228, l. 23 f. It was a custom for the bishop to resist election, in appearance at least.
FM P. 228, l. 31. Carthage was so called to distinguish it from Carthage in Spain (Cartagena).
FN P. 232, l. 18. The vicarius was an officer subordinate to the count.
FO P. 232, c. 7. The reference seems to be wholly to back taxes due from the church.
FP P. 233, c. 8. This is a tale from Gregory’s home town. He must have known personally some at least of the persons mentioned. The time of the incidents may be inferred from these facts: Bishop Cautinus died in 571; duke Desiderius died about 587, and Gregory is writing between 590 and 592.
FQ P. 235, l. 11. 590 A.D.
FR P. 235, c. 10. In this case the trial by combat yielded no verdict. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, vol. II, p. 440 (edition of 1892).
FS P. 244, l. 32. The “swarm of flies” was the medium through which this man became “possessed.” In De Virtut. S. Martin, I, c. 53, a cloud of dust has the same effect. Cf. also De Virtut. S. Martin, III, c. 16, 20.
FT P. 245, l. 19. Episcopis ac civibus. The meaning of the last word may be “people of the civitas (city),” i.e. “townsfolk.”
FU P. 246, l. 3. See Note on p. 189, l. 20.
FV P. 246, l. 23 f. A similar case of summary punishment is found on p. 199. Cf. also pp. 38, 48-50, 176.
FW P. 246, l. 36. The cathedral church in the city. Below (p. 247, l. 21 f.) the reference is to St. Martin’s church.
FX P. 247, l. 13. The reference is to a legend dating back to the time of the emperor Maximian (285-310) and centering about St. Maurice (cf. p. 54). The legion, consisting wholly of Christians from the East, was commanded to take part in the persecution of the Christians. On its refusal its members were executed to a man. The question of the authenticity of the legend has given rise to a long controversy. See Art., Theban Legion, New Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia.
FY P. 247, l. 32 f. Appeals of this sort are common in the literature of the age. Compare the following: “I adjure thee, who shalt transcribe this book, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by his glorious appearing, when he comes to judge the living and the dead, that thou compare what thou has transcribed, and be careful to set it right according to this copy from which thou hast transcribed; also that thou in like manner copy down this adjuration, and insert it in the transcript.” Irenaeus, De Ogdoade (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. I, p. 568).
FZ P. 248, l. 2. Martianus Capella wrote, about 450, a work on the seven liberal arts much used in medieval schools. Cf. Introd., p. xiii.
GENEALOGY OF MEROVINGIAN KINGS
(Mentioned in the History of the Franks)
Clogio
Merovech
Childeric, d. 481
Clovis, d. 511
Theodoric I, d. 534
Theodobert I, d. 548
Theobalde, d. 555
Clodmer, d. 524
Childebert I, d. 558
Clothar I, d. 561
Charibert I, d. 567/8
Gunthram, d. 592
Chilperic m. Fredegunda, d. 584
Clothar II, d.629
Sigibert m. Brunhilda, d. 575
Childebert II, d. 595
Theodobert II, d. 612
Theodoric II, d. 613