Visigoths, Sueves, Vandals, and Alans: Shifting Attitudes toward Barbarians in Sources of Late-Antique Hispania and Gregory of Tours (pdf)
Abstract:
In view of the limitations of space for this collection of essays, it is not possible to include all writers from Gallia and Hispania; for our purposes here, it is not necessary that we do so. The essay limits itself beginning with bishop Hydatius of Chaves (c. 400-469) since he was one of the earliest commentators about the initial entry of the barbarian tribes into Hispania. At the other end, bishop Isidore of Seville (c. 560-636) offers a view that had developed later about these tribes, notably the Visigoths. He is supplemented with the writing of John of Biclar (c. 540-post-621), the acts of the Third Council of Toledo (589), and bishop Leander of Seville’s (c. 534-c. 600) homily delivered at that same council. The words of bishop Gregory of Tours (c. 538/39-594), too, have been included for two reasons: one, to offer an external view of the barbarians that settled in Hispania, and secondly because he had knowledge of many events in Hispania. Read together, these writers reveal changing attitudes about the non-indigenous people that settled permanently, some more than others, in Hispania beginning in the fifth century.
Essay:
Hydatius: Invasion and Settlement of Hispania
What is of interest to us is how Hydatius viewed the barbarians in the initial entry into Gallaecia specifically and generally Hispania. It is not necessary to cite every single entry where the barbarians were mentioned. This study focuses on the entries that reveal Hydatius’s attitude toward them. Julio Campos fittingly emphasized that the Chronicon reflects the work of the first historian of Hispania that included the history of Rome and that of the barbarians in the fifth century from 379 to 469.[1]
Of paramount importance is that Hydatius was describing an invasion of his homeland by uninvited outsiders: that in itself determined much of his overall perspective about the invaders. Invasions by their very nature are disruptive, violent, and traumatic. Another feature is that Hydatius’s perspective was decidedly Roman. Julio Campos astutely observed that the Chronicon was dated by the year of the ruling emperors, East and West, not that of the regnal years of the barbarian rulers.[2] This approach to dating need not surprise us: the Roman Empire was fragile but it had not yet disappeared wholly in the West. Hydatius and contemporaries for sure wished that the barbarian presence in Hispania would be short-lived. In due time, sooner than they expected, the collapse came in the West but not in Hydatius’s lifetime. The barbarians would stay permanently. Another factor that is most important is that Hydatius believed that all of the events were part of the plan of God, this was not independent human behavior separate from Divine Providence. Hydatius even described himself as a servant of Jesus Christ the Lord and hence his work was perceived as divinely driven.[3]
In the Preface to his Chronicon, Hydatius highlighted the devastation the barbarians visited on the Roman Empire that generated confusion in Gallaecia, a land known to be in the extremity of the world: “intra extremam uniuersi orbis Galleciam.”[4] He was precise about the date of entry of the Alans, Vandals, and Sueves. It was in the era 447, some say the 28th and others on Tuesday the 12th of October in the eighth year of the consulate of Honorius and the third of Theodosius, son of Arcadius.[5] Immediately the barbarians devastated and assassinated their enemies; a plague simultaneously broke out that added to the mayhem. The barbarians were blamed for causing extensive hunger that provoked cannibalism. It even drove women to allegedly eat their dead children after cooking them. Wild beasts ate the strong men that caused more destruction of the human race.
Significantly, Hydatius believed that the calamities were the four plagues foretold by the prophets: the sword, famine, plague, and wild beasts. These do not correspond to the four plagues found in Revelation, the end times discourses of Jesus, or the prophet Daniel. Hydatius did not name the prophets who foretold the calamity.[6] Yet, Hydatius was convinced that the punishments were mysteriously part of Divine Providence. For example, he added in the next section that the mercy of the Lord led them to establish peace: “ad pacem ineundam, domino miserante.”[7]
Peace came at a price, however. Hydatius added that although the Spani in the cities and castles survived the plagues, they submitted as slaves of the barbarians: “Spani per ciuitates et castella residui a plagis barbarorum per prouincias dominantium se subiciunt seruituti.”[8] Hydatius proceeded to describe where the barbarian tribes settled in Hispania at that juncture. A great deal more fighting and movement lay in the near future, as each tribe fought for hegemony. One clearly senses that Hydatius resigned himself to the view that invasions and plagues were part of the Divine plan for Hispania. Hydatius may not have liked it, but he never resorted to asking: Why us? Why now? Hydatius was the first chronicler who recorded the conversion of the first barbarian king, the Sueve Rechiarius (c. 415-456), preceding Clovis’s conversion c. 508. His father Rechila (d. 448), however, died a pagan: “Rechila rex Sueuorum Emerita gentilis moritur mense Augusto: cui mox filius suus catholicus Rechiarius succedit in regnum.”[9]
In much of the Chronicon, Hydatius described how the Visigoths, above all, were recruited by Rome to remove the other tribes from Hispania: Vandals, Alans, and Sueves. One example was Wallia (c. 385-418), king of the Visigoths: “Vallia rex Gothorum Romani nominis causa intra Hispanias caedes magnas efficit barbarorum.”[10] When the dust eventually cleared, the Vandals left voluntarily for North Africa, even though they were on the verge of conquering all of Hispania. The Alans, on the other hand, were annihilated.[11] The Sueves after near total destruction recovered and established a kingdom in Gallaecia that lasted about for about 174 years (411-585).[12] The Visigoths after subjugating the Sueves in 585 ruled over the entire peninsula, except for a few coastal territories conquered by the emperor Justinian (r. 482-565) which would eventually be conquered by the Visigoths in the 620s. The official presence of the Roman Empire rapidly disappeared altogether in Hispania. To learn more about Gallaecia and Hispania after 469 one has to turn to other chroniclers from Hispania and Gregory of Tours.
When we arrive at John of Biclar, the Third Council of Toledo (589), Leander of Seville, Isidore of Seville, and Gregory of Tours much had changed since the era of Hydatius. Isidore and John did not propose a causal relationship between the barbarians and famines, plagues, and strange climate phenomenon as did Hydatius. Barbarians, according to Hydatius, not only disrupted civilized society, they even brought disorder to nature itself. Important to Isidore, John of Biclar, and Gregory of Tours was the struggle between the Arian Visigoths vs. the Catholic Sueves and Catholic Hispano-Romans that reached its climax under king Reccared (r. 586-601) at the Third Council of Toledo. Of the two, John provided more details about that conversion than did Isidore; the latter produced a precis of the Creed of Nicaea. One thing is certain, a major change of perception of the barbarians definitely had taken place.
John of Biclar
The most recent overall discussions on John of Biclar’s text is in Cardelle de Hartmann and Roger Collin’s edition. It should be supplemented with the editions listed in the note.[13] The main focus of the text, as they mention, was the confrontation of Byzantium and the Visigoths: the complex relationship between the Arian king Liuvigild (r. 568-586) and his two sons Hermenegild (d. 585) and Reccared.[14] The Sueves, on the other hand, as I have elsewhere demonstrated, are only important in relation to the Visigoths, who were the main focus of the Chronicon.[15]
An early commentator of John of Biclar, Julio Campos described John’s approach to Liuvigild as ‘objective and cold impartiality’. This in spite of his relentless pursuit of his rebellious son Hermenegild who sought to usurp his father after becoming Catholic. Added to this, Liuvigild had persecuted Catholics. This makes John’s objective attitude all the more remarkable. Campos expressed it this way, “Ahora la objetividad y fría imparcialidad de nuestro cronista la forma en que relata lo que atañe a Leovigildo y Hermenegildo. Aunque católico ferviente, y desterrado por el rey, no se advierte en su crónica censura alguna de la conducta de Leovigildo en la guerra contra su hijo […] aplicando los duros calificativos de tyrannum filium, rebellem, tyrannidem assumens.”[16]
Similar negative language was used by Isidore against Hermenegild. Neither chronicler wanted to give justification to the violent overthrow of a sitting king, especially by a family member: it not only violated biblical teaching, it also would set a precedent that would in the end weaken the monarchy and plunge society into anarchy. Unlike the Chronicon of Hydatius, John of Biclar dated each entry on the year of the Roman and Visigothic rulers, giving them mutual importance.[17] Much had transpired that brought about a more positive view: the Sueves and Visigoths had inserted their power into the Hispania narrative. John of Biclar accepted the new situation and so developed a positive attitude toward them, in particular to the Visigoths after their conversion. This was expressed long ago by Pablo Álvarez Rubiano.[18]
The central theme of the last third of John’s work is on Liuvigild and Reccared, father and son kings: the former an Arian heretic, the latter a Catholic who eventually unified Hispania spiritually in 589. In the midst of this change was the other ambitious Catholic son Hermenegild, for some a pretentious usurper and for others a martyr. Writers of the era disagreed on whether to consider Hermenegild a martyr or a rebellious son of the legitimate king.[19] What is puzzling to some is why John of Biclar expressed so much sympathy and admiration for Liuvigild, even though he was an Arian heretic who persecuted the Church, in sharp contrast to the Catholic son, Hermenegild whom he accused of illicit rebellion. Liuvigild was extolled by John of Biclar, likely in part because his conquest of the peninsula provided the requisite territorial unity that would facilitate the spiritual unity that his son Reccared brought about with his conversion to the Catholic faith.[20]
Attempted regicide and rebellion against Liuvigild by his son, regardless of the former being an Arian, was unanimously condemned by other writers. The biblical background for this view brings to mind the story of Saul and David, where the latter although having opportunity to kill Saul who was in pursuit to kill him, refused to raise the sword against God’s anointed king, “He said to his men, “The Lord forbid that I should do such a thing to my master, the Lord’s anointed, or lay my hand on him; for he is the anointed of the Lord.” (I Samuel 24: 6- NIV). This biblical mindset was explicitly promoted by Gregory of Tours in his evaluation of the rebellion. He had Hermenegild say, “My father does wrong to attack me […] It is a sin for a father to be killed by a son, or a son to be killed by a father” to which Gregory added, “Poor prince, he did not realize that the judgement of God hangs over anyone who makes such plans against his own father, even if the father be a heretic.”[21]
The two statements in Gregory of Tours’s Libri historiarum reflect accurately the sentiments of the passage from I Samuel that was creatively adapted by John of Biclar. Only Pope Gregory the Great (c. 540-604) in his Dialogues 3.31 departed from this negative tone. He wrote that Hermenegild was not a tyrant-usurper and praised him as a heroic Catholic martyr. The pope wrote that after being imprisoned by his father, Hermenegild “fostered an intense longing for his heavenly kingdom by lying on sackcloth.” He was also “the fearless confessor” and “king and martyr” and after his execution a cult of veneration emerged, “Some even report that burning lamps appeared at night. As a result, the faithful began to show his body the veneration due the remains of a true martyr; and rightly so.” In the end, Reccared made the choice, “Soon thereafter, king Reccared gave up the heretical ways of his father to follow the example of his martyrbrother.”[22] In contrast to the pope, as noted, John of Biclar or Isidore of Seville used condemnatory language to describe Hermenegild. For Isidore, he was a ‘tyrant’ pure and simple.[23]
In the Chronicon of John of Biclar, Reccared and the Third Council of Toledo are the high point because it led the peoples of Hispania to full spiritual unity after his Arian father had established territorial unity.[24] A comparison between John of Biclar and Isidore reveals how subdued the latter was about the council, in sharp contrast to John who was effusive in his praise of the king and the council. In the Weltanschauung of John all of these events transpired within the providential plan of God, as Pedro Juan Galán Sánchez noticed, “Las manifestaciones del providencialismo son escasas en la Crónica del Biclarense; y ello es otra de las causa [sic] que ha llevado a alabar la objetividad de nuestro autor. Pero, de todas formas, en Juan de Bíclaro no falta la idea de que la Providencia divina gobierna y preside la historia.”[25]
Liuvigild as much as Reccared, even Hermenegild, were essential players of this Divine design. Just as the mad raging Saul was intent on killing the future king David, both were indispensable for the future of Israel. Part of the ire of John and Isidore against Hermenegild was triggered by his reaching out to the Byzantines to help him depose his father. The Byzantines and Visigoths were enemies: the former were considered by the latter to be foreign invaders that divided the territorial integrity of the kingdom and posed a real threat to Liuvigild, the Arian.[26] John systematically chronicled Liuvigild’s successful territorial conquest of Hispania. He went so far as to laud him for bringing peace at last by removing ‘tyrants’ in all parts: “Leouegildus rex, extinctis undique tirannis et peruasoribus Ispanie superatis, sortitus requiem propriam cum plebe resedit.”[27] Up to this point, John did not use any derogatory language to describe Liuvigild.
When John spoke about Hermenegild for the first time, he was identified as one who took up the tyranny of his Catholic wife Ingundis (c. 561-584) a Frankish princess, who persuaded him to become Catholic, thus setting up the conflict with his father: “Ermenegildus factione Gosuinthe regine tirannidem assumens in Ispali ciuitate rebellione facta recluditur.”[28] Hermenegild and Ingundis were labeled tyrants and rebels in the faith and politically. John commented that this was worse than an invasion by enemies from without: “maioris exitii quam aduersariorum infestatio fuit.”[29] Liuvigild gathered his men to subjugate his tyrant son: “Leouegildus rex exercitum ad expugnandum tirannum filium colligit.”[30] When he found him at Seville, he surrounded the city where he captured the rebellious son, the “rebellem filium.”[31] There is emphasis throughout on the cities that Liuvigild built. He simply stated that Hermenegild died in Tarragona, no judgement passed on the fate of his soul for rebelling against his father: “Hermenegildus in urbe Tarragonensi a Sisberto interficitur.”[32]
In the entry that recorded Liuvigild’s death, nothing is said about his Arian heresy or the fate of his soul: “Hoc anno Leouegildus rex diem clausit extremum.”[33] Nothing more was said about Liuvigild and Hermenegild, the remainder of the Chronicon is about Reccared and the triumph of the Catholic faith over Arianism. Pope Gregory the Great’s portrait of Hermenegild as martyr contributed to his eventual elevation to sainthood in 1585 by Pope Sixtus V at the request of King Philip II of Spain. As regards Gregory of Tours’s take on the fate of Liuvigild in this life and the hereafter, that is discussed below.
Isidore of Seville
Isidore’s lamentably short De Origine Gothorum, Historia Wandalorum, Historia Sueborum is the only chronicle from Hispania that aggregates information about the three principal Germanic tribes – Visigoths, Vandals, and Sueves – that fought for hegemony of Hispania. This first section on the Visigoths is the longest that Isidore dedicated to the three tribes. (If only had Isidore had been as verbose as Gregory of Tours.) Notwithstanding the brevity of Isidore’s chronicle, it is of immense value. Even though there are battles aplenty and a description of how the barbarians subjugated Hispania, the main theme for Isidore was the conversion of the barbarians to the Catholic faith. The benchmark on how one was portrayed was determined principally whether a person was Arian or Catholic, all other identities were secondary or irrelevant.[34]
Visigoths
Athanaric (r. 369-381) was the first to persecute Christians because they refused to sacrifice to idols: Arianism had not yet been adopted by the Visigoths: “quia idolis immolare non adquieuerunt.”[35] Under the emperor Valens (r. 364-378), Athanaric after defeating Fridigern (fl. 370s) asked the emperor for teachers of the Christian faith. Valens had previously abandoned the Catholic faith to become an Arian. Henceforth it was the heresy the Visigoths professed. The Arians were described as holding to a perverted heresy that used wicked arguments to win the Visigoths over to an erroneous doctrine that was a toxic poison. Isidore added that the Visigoths remained in the error for a very long time: “But Valens, who had strayed from the truth of the Catholic faith and held the perversity of the Arian heresy, sent them heretical priests and by wicked persuasion attached the Goths to his own erroneous doctrine, and by a destructive seed he transferred a noxious poison into such a famous nation, and thus kept and preserved for a long time the error, which credulous people had recently absorbed.”[36]
Another turning point in the Historia is the conversion of the barbarians. For the Visigoths a decisive moment was the missionary work of Ulfilas (c. 311-383), who was Arian.[37] Isidore added that they remained in this heresy for 213 years. It caused a deep rift with the majority of Hispano-Romans who remained Catholic.[38] When describing the sack of Rome by Alaric, he singled out the clemency of the Visigoths – “tantum autem Gothis clementes” – to any who took refuge in the churches, even to those who could not get in because they were packed with refugees; he did not mention it but the Pantheon was spared destruction.[39] Even though Arian, they shared the same sacraments, martyrs, saints, and New Testament with the Catholics.
In chapters 16 and 17, the story of the elderly holy virgin who carried vessels of silver and gold from the shrine of Peter – possibly for the liturgy – is illustrative. When the Goth found out that they were from the shrine of Peter, it was reported to the king who in turn ordered them immediately restored to the shrine and the king allegedly said that he was waging war against the Romans not the apostles.[40] Much later, under king Theudis, era 569 (531), although a heretic, he granted peace to the Church, even allowing them to meet in Toledo and teach the Catholic faith.[41]
Matters were not always harmonious between Arian rulers and the Church, the reign of king Agila (r. 549-554) is an example. He persecuted Catholics in Córdoba, even profaning the shrine of the martyr Acisclus (d. 304). The saints [in heaven] punished him by bringing about the death of his son in battle.[42] Liuvigild is pivotal in the Historia since he was the last of the ruling Arian kings of Hispania. Liuvigild was described as replete with perfidious furor – “Denique Arrianae perfidiae furore repletes” – of the Arian heresy who persecuted Catholics and exiled many of their bishops. Isidore described Arianism as a plague, “Arrianam pestilentiam,” and as a contagion, “cetera haeresis suae contagia.” He added to Liuvigild’s offenses the charge that he led laity and priests to be rebaptized as Arians, the most well-known being a Vincent of Zaragoza.[43]
All of this changed with the advent of his son Reccared to the throne in 586 after Liuvigild died. The rehabilitation of the Visigoths was afoot in the Historia of Isidore, but before that Gregory of Tours had started to salvage the reputation of Liuvigild. This is somewhat surprising in view of the well-known detestation that Gregory had of Arians. He was the only writer who wrote that Liuvigild on his deathbed repented of his heresy and professed the Catholic faith, even ordering that it be forbidden in the kingdom. We are informed that he wept and repented for seven days for the evil he caused before expiring: “Soon after this Leuvigild (sic), King of Spain, fell ill. There are some who say that he repented of his heretical errors and embraced the Catholic faith, giving orders that from then on Arianism should be strictly forbidden. When he had wept for seven days for the wrongs which he had done against God, he gave up the ghost. His son Recared (sic) reigned in his place.” This is a version that neither John of Biclar nor Isidore included in their chronicles.[44]
Isidore praised Reccared for convening the Third Council of Toledo, for that God assisted him to put down his enemies.[45] In chapters 55-56 of his History, Isidore heaped more lavish praise on Reccared for his generosity and restoration of the Church, in contrast to his heretical father.[46] Isidore took notice of Reccared’s many virtuous works and character: he preserved peace, brought order with justice, ruled with temperance, surpassed goodness, was charming in his countenance, was of so much kindness of heart that even the evil came to love him, restored property to citizens and churches that his father had disgraced, was clement with others, and alleviated people’s tributes with leniency.[47] If that was not enough, there was more adulation: he enriched many with gifts, bestowed public honors, was generous to the poor, and, of utmost importance, he supported and propagated the faith.[48]
Perception of the Visigoths had come a long way since the early days of Hydatius. What is noticeable is that the main criteria to judge someone was now whether a person was Arian or Catholic, from the king down to the peasant, all other factors were secondary. A brief comparison of how Isidore contrasted Liuvigild and Reccared is enlightening: Liuvigild was irreligious (“namque ille inreligiosus”), warlike (“et bello promptissimus”), and conquered with arms (“ille armorum artibus gentis imperium dilatans.”). Reccared, in contrast, was reverent toward religion (“cultu praeditus religionis”), devout (“hic fide pius”), conquered with peace (“et pace praeclarus”), and led the people to the trophy of the faith (“hic gloriosus eandem gentem fidei trophaeo sublimans”).[49] Reccared died, as befitted a benevolent king, a peaceful death in Toledo (“Toleto fine pacifico transiit. Qui regnauit annos XV”), whereas Liuvigild’s death, according to Isidore was simply of natural death in Toledo after eighteen years of rule (“regnauit autem annis XVIII defunctus propia morte Toleto”). Isidore passed no judgment on the fate of Liuvigild’s soul.[50]
Vandals
At chapters 72-73 of his History, Isidore reproduced Hydatius’s description of the devastation of the invasion precipitated by the Vandals, Alans, and Sueves, including the reference that it fulfilled the four plagues foretold by the anonymous prophets.[51] Gunderic, the first Vandal king (r. 418-428), was struck down by a demon for desecrating the basilica of the martyr Vincent (d. 304); the Vandals were from the outset enemies of the Catholic faith: “Since with the authority of his royal power he irreverently stretched forth his hands against the basilica of the martyr Vincentius of this city (Seville), by the decision of God he was presently seized by a demon at the gate of the shrine and perished.”[52]
King Gaiseric (r. 428-477), the brother of Gunderic, was a Catholic who apostatized and so became the first Vandal leader to become an Arian. We are not apprised by Isidore about the circumstances under which he became Catholic: “In the era 467 (429), Gaiseric, the brother of Gunderic, succeeded to the kingship, and his reigned lasted forty years; from a Catholic he became an apostate and is said to have been the first to go over to the Arian falsehood.”[53] The cast was set, Vandals being enemies of the Catholic faith is what made them cruel and vicious barbarians. Gaiseric made matters worse when he introduced Arianism in North Africa; as a result, he exiled Catholic priests, made many martyrs, and transferred churches to the Arians, in fulfillment we are told what was foretold in Daniel’s prophecy.[54] The reference to the book of Daniel was not specific, no prophecy in that book corresponds to the text. The Arian missionary work in Africa was abetted through the use of the sword of Gaiseric. His son Huneric (r. 477-484) succeeded him and became a fanatical Arian that exceeded his father in the persecution of Catholics in Africa. He destroyed churches, exiled priests and clergy of all orders, exiled about 4,000 monks and laity, made martyrs, and cut the tongues of confessors that continued speaking (i.e., professing the faith) miraculously absent their tongues “Qui et ipse Arriano suscitatus furores catholicos per totam Africam.”[55] His highest profile victim, bishop Laetus of Nepte was martyred after Huneric failed to convert him to Arianism.
Isidore said that Huneric died like Arius, with his entrails poured out.[56] Under Gunthamund (r. 484-496), successor of Huneric, the Church experienced a brief respite from persecution, even exiled Catholics were allowed to return. Isidore did not identify him specifically as Catholic and did not explain why he was clement toward Catholics: “Qui statim ecclesiae pacem reformans catholicos ab exilio reuocauit.”[57] Matters turned suddenly from tolerance to persecution for Catholics with the ascension of Thrasamund (r. 496-523) to the throne. He was an ardent Arian who closed churches and exiled 120 bishops from Africa to nearby Sardinia: “ecclesias claudit, Sardiniam exilio ex omni Africana ecclesia CXX episcopos mittit.”[58] Hilderic (r. 523-530), son of Huneric, succeeded Thrasamund. Thrasamund bound Hilderic to an oath to preserve his anti-Catholic policy, he was not to open the churches of Catholics or restore their privileges. Hilderic cunningly did just that, before becoming king so as not to violate the oath he swore to uphold. He also permitted exiled priest to return and restored churches. Again, we do not have inside information whether he was Catholic or what motivated him to be favorable toward Catholics.[59] The balance of Isidore’s account focused on the demise of the Vandal kingdom at the hands of the armies of Justinian. Throughout this, Arianism and Arian believers were described consistently with derogatory terms: “Arrianam fertur transisse perfidiam, Arrianam pestilentiam, ipse Arriano suscitatus furores, and Arriana insania.” It is obvious that something else was at play here that is worth noting. The Vandals were not just bringing about devastation, persecution, exile, and executions. Of greater urgency was the spiritual realm. Arianism was a mortal threat to the soul, it threatened to consign people to eternal damnation; that was the more serious concern in comparison to the temporal nature of persecution in this life.
Sueves
The Sueves were treated differently by Isidore and Gregory of Tours; I include the latter because he recorded events that are unique to his account. In John of Biclar’s Chronicon they were of little importance, he devoted but a mere nine entries on the Sueves, mentioned within the context of the Visigoths, who were his main focus.[60] Relevant also are the acts of the Third Council of Toledo (589) and Leander of Seville’s homily that he prepared for the council.[61] It can be affirmed that the Sueves received a more positive “press” because of their Catholic faith. In Isidore, two distinct journeys of the Sueves were chronicled in what amounts to only a few pages in his History. The first one was their migration into Hispania, their many battles for hegemony, the establishment of an independent kingdom in Gallaecia, and their final demise at the hands of the Arian King Liuvigild in 585. The second was their spiritual journey from paganism to Arianism to their final permanent conversion to the Catholic faith. Gregory of Tours wrote a singular account about the conversion of the Sueves that is unique to his De virtutibus sancti Martini 1.11.[62] Nowhere in Isidore were the Sueves condemned for persecuting Catholics, even in their Arian phase. Gregory of Tours, a formidable opponent of Arianism reflected the same view about the Sueves, albeit in a Gallic context.[63] In Gregory’s Libri historiarum, the Arian Visigoths were by contrast consistently portrayed as evil, never the Sueves.
Isidore offered a succinct account of how the Sueves eventually became Catholic. In 440, Rechila (d. 448) ascended to the throne and after eight years of conquests he died at Mérida still a pagan: “Atque inde Emerita sub cultu, ut ferunt, gentilitatis uitam finiuit.”[64] The first of the newly arrived barbarians to convert to the Catholic faith was Rechiarius, son of Rechila, who came to power in 448 and ruled for nine years. Isidore did not disclose the circumstances that led to his conversion: “Recciarius Reccilani filius catholicus factus succedit in regnum annis VIIII.”[65] A turning point in their conversion journey transpired under king Remismund (r. 464-469) in 464 with the arrival of an Arian missionary named Alax [Alax, Aiax, Ajax]. He was an apostate Catholic from Gaul who led the Sueves to the Arian faith; the heresy described by Isidore as the enemy of the Catholic faith and the Divine Trinity. The region of the Goths in Gallia (“de Gallicana Gothorum regione”) was the Arian Visigothic kingdom of Toulouse. It was, moreover, a pestilent virus that inflicted a lethal infirmity. Isidore added that many kings of the Sueves remained in the Arian heresy until their final and permanent conversion.[66] We are left in the dark as to who specifically dispatched Alax to Gallaecia. His efforts to convert the Sueves were effective. The next decisive step that led to their final conversion to the Catholic faith was attributed by Isidore to king Theudemir (d. 570) with the aid of Martin of Braga (c. 520-580). There is no dispute about Martin’s vital role; there is, however, on Theudemir’s place in the conversion. Isidore and Gregory of Tours wrote two irreconcilable accounts, with the later attributing the conversion to a king Chararic through the relics of Martin of Tours. Modern scholars have offered various scenarios to explain the two divergent accounts. This is not the place to sort it all out again. I have done so in a previous publication where I offered a satisfactory explanation.[67] There is no report of left-over Arians being persecuted or summoned to an official gathering to abjure their heresy, as happened in Toledo in 589 with the Visigoths. It was presented by Isidore as a seamless peaceful transition. The Sueves would never return to the Arian heresy, they resisted efforts from the fervent Arian Liuvigild to revert to Arianism: he conquered their kingdom in 585 but not their Catholic faith.
In comparison to the Visigoths and Vandals, the Sueves were portrayed in a positive light by Isidore, Gregory of Tours, and the mostly indifferent John of Biclar. The Sueves were never described as persecuting Catholics when they were either pagan or Arian; there were no exiles, martyrs, destruction, or confiscation of churches. There is one statement in the opening speech at the First Council of Braga (561) that convened in the third year of the reign of king Ariamir (d. before 566) that hints at some tension in the era of Arian rulers with the Catholic bishops. The presiding bishop Lucretius of Braga said that it had been a long time that the bishops had desired to assemble. It appears that under the Suevic Arian rulers they had been forbidden to do so. At long last, though, under the present Catholic king they were permitted to gather in a major council.[68]
Third Council of Toledo / Leander of Seville
In the acts of the Third Council of Toledo and the homily that was prepared by Leander of Seville and appended to the council records there are references to the Sueves that are pertinent. In other publications cited in this study, I have examined the texts and their place in the conversion of the Sueves, a summary is only necessary here. The main point at the Toledo council about the Sueves is that they were rescued from the Arian heresy by Reccared, the champion of the Catholic faith. I have demonstrated that this was at best a misleading representation of the state of the Sueves, regarding their faith. They needed no rescuing from Arianism by Reccared, they had been Catholic for several decades before the Toledo council. The purpose of the council, Leander’s sermon, and we include for good measure the Chronicon of John of Biclar was to present Reccared as the new Constantine and Maurice. Reccared according to John of Biclar actually superseded the efforts of two emperors who failed to do what he had done, the complete extirpation of Arianism. The timeline for a reversion to Arianism of the Sueves does not permit it and other evidence argues against it. Ever since 550, with the arrival of Martin of Braga, the Sueves were solidly grounded in the Catholic faith; Liuvigild did not have time to convert them to Arianism. It is telling that of the Arian bishops from Gallaecia that attended the council to renounce the heresy, not one of them was the bishop of Braga. Liuvigild apparently did not have the opportunity to appoint an Arian one.[69]
The same can be said about Leander’s homily, “Leander’s enthusiastic reference to countless converts was also exaggerated at the council as a means to enhance their victory over the Arians.”[70] John of Biclar followed the same narrative that all of the Visigoths and Sueves were united in the faith as a result of the council of Toledo: “gentemque omnium Gothorum et Sueuorum ad unitatem et pacem reuocat Christiane ecclesie.”[71] The role of Martin of Braga in the conversion of the Sueves was completely set aside at the council of Toledo, Leander’s homily, and John of Biclar’s Chronicon. This was not out of ignorance, it was deliberate.[72]
Conclusion
These findings identify the following attitudes that developed in Gallia and Hispania toward Visigoths, Vandals, Alans, and Sueves beginning with Hydatius to the seventh century. The individual tribes, however, were not all treated in the same manner: their representation was determined by the agenda of the specific chronicler and the phase that the barbarians were in at that time. The chronicles contain the expected reporting of battles, assassinations, betrayals, usurpations, other human caused devastation, portents, unusual natural phenomenon, and famines. These, however, were not in the end the most important determining factors on evaluating the barbarian tribes. The central story line was the conversion of the Sueves and Visigoths to the Catholic faith. The Alans scarcely exist in the written narratives and archaeology in Hispania, their sojourn was short-lived. In the case of the Vandals, they earned a separate chapter in Isidore. That people never experienced a permanent conversion to the Catholic faith and departed abruptly from Hispania to North Africa. The Vandals were useful for Isidore in relation to the two main tribes: Visigoths and Sueves. In the end, Sueves and Visigoths won the most important battle whose lasting effect was eternal: their conversion and unwavering faithfulness to the Catholic faith.
In keeping with the goals of this symposium about attitudes toward barbarians in modern popular culture, varying perceptions about them already emerged in the late Roman Empire. Two attitudes had been set for future writers: one, they were barbarians in the true sense of wreaking havoc, being brutes and illiterate, natural disasters accompanied them, and worse still they were pagans and Arians. The barbarians were enemies of Roman culture with no interest in preserving any of it; the second, the Goths in particular were proposed as heirs of the Roman Empire whose intent was to preserve and perpetuate that culture as best as they could. This is expressed by Isidore in his Prologue (De laude Spaniae) to his History, “Thus rightly did golden Rome, the head of nations, once desired you, and although the same Romulaean virtue, first victorious, betrothed you to itself, at last, nevertheless the most flourishing nation of the Goths after many victories in the world eagerly captured and loved you, and enjoys you up to the present amid royal insignia and abundant wealth, secure in the felicity of empire.”[73] A favorable view of the Visigoths began to surface after they abandoned their paganism and Arian heresy, the result of successful evangelization. This latter positive view has been confirmed to be based on reality by Pierre Riché and Yitzhak Hen in two monographs that highlight certain barbarian kings who actively conserved and promoted Greco-Roman culture in their emergent kingdoms. The dominant modern stereotype of the barbarian tribes as being the late-antique version of a biker gang hellbent on only destruction fails to represent adequately who they really were.[74]
NOTES
[1] I used firstly the edition by R.W. Burgess, ed. The Chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constatinopolitana. Two Contemporary Accounts of the Final Years of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993). Another excellent edition is at Julio Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, Obispo de Chaves (s. IV-V) (Salamanca: Ediciones Calasancias, 1984), 9. His edition of Hydatius conveniently includes references to Paulus Orosius and other writers. It is based on the MGH Theodore Mommsen text.
[2] Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, 10.
[3] The most far-reaching study that includes the major writers extraneous to Hispania is in Suzanne Teillet, Des Goths à la Nation Gothique. Les origines de l’idée de nation en Occident du Ve au VIIe siècle, Collection D’Études Anciennes (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1984). On Hydatius see, pp. 207–52, John of Biclar, pp. 421–55, Isidore, pp. 463–501 and Toledo 589, pp. 449-55. Gregory the Great, pp. 335–66, Gregory of Tours, pp. 367–420, and Leander, throughout the volume.
[4] “Constat debacchantibus iam in Romano solo barbaris omnia haberi permixta atque confusa.” Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, pp. 72 and 74. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, IV, and VII, pp. 42 and 44. For a discussion of the early Suevic kings consult Pablo C. Díaz, El Reino Suevo (411-585). Akal Universitaria, Serie Reinos y Dominios en la Historia de España, 312 (Madrid: Ediciones Akal, 2011), 69–102.
[5] “Alani, et Vandali et Sueui Hispanias ingressi aera CCCCXLVII. Alii IIIIo kl. alii IIIIo kl. idus Octubris memorant die tertia feria, Honorio VIII et Theodosio Arcadi filio III consulibus.” Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 80. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XV, pp. 54–56.
[6] “Debaccantibus per Hispanias barbaris et seuiente nihilominus pestilentiae malo opes et conditam in urbibus substantiam tyrannicus exactor diripit et milites exauriunt. Fames dira crassatur, adeo ut humanae carnes ab humano genere ui famis fuerint deuoratae: matres quoque necatis uel coctis per se natorum suorum sint paste corporibus […] Et ita quatuor plagis ferri famis pestilentie bestiarum ubique in toto orbe seuientibus, predicte a domino per prophetas suos adnuntiationes implentur.” Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 82. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XVI, pp. 56–58.
[7] Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 82. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XVII, p. 58.
[8] Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 82. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XVII, p. 58.
[9] Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 98. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XXIIII, p. 88.
[10] Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 84. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XXIII, p. 64.
[11] Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 86. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XXIIII, p. 64.
[12] For the Sueves see the monographs, Wilhem Reinhart. Historia General del Reino Hispánico de los Suevos. Publicaciones del Seminario de Historia Primitiva del Hombre, monografías 1 (Madrid, 1952), Casimiro Torres Rodríguez, El Reino de los Suevos. Colección ‘Galicia Histórica’ Fundación Barrie de la Maza (A Coruña, 1977), and Díaz, El Reino Suevo (411-585).
[13] In addition to the Julio Campos edition, Juan de Biclaro. Obispo de Gerona. Su Vida y su Obra, C.S.I.C. Escuela de Estudios Medievales, Estudios, 32 (Madrid: C.S.I.C., 1960), 77–100, there are Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann and Roger Collins, eds., Iohannis Biclarensis “Chronicon,” Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 173A (Turnhout: Brepols, 2001), 59–83 and Pablo Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense. Versión castellana y notas para su estudio,” Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 16 (1943): 7–44. Detailed commentary is in Teillet, Des Goths à la Nation Gothique, 421–55.
[14] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, Chronicon, 129. An extended discussion is in Pedro Juan Galán Sánchez, El género historiográfico de la chronica. Las crónicas hispanas de época visigoda. Anejo Anuario de Estudios Filológicos, 12 (Cáceres: Universidad de Extremadura, 1994), 81–172.
[15] Alberto Ferreiro, “The Sueves in the Chronica of John of Biclaro.” Latomus. Revue d’études latines 46 (1987): 201–03.
[16] Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 57.
[17] Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 12–13.
[18] Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 13.
[19] Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 13.
[20] Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 13. Alberto Ferreiro, “The Sueves in the Chronica of John of Biclaro,” 201–03.
[21] LH, 5.38, 6.43, in Gregorii Episcopi Tvronensis, Libri historiarum X, Monumenta Germaniae Historica 1.1, Scriptorum Rerum Merovingicarum (Hanover, 1951), 243–45 and 314–16. Lewis Thorpe, Gregory of Tours. “The History of the Franks” (New York: Penguin Books, 1974), 303 and 375.
[22] Saint Gregory the Great, Dialogues in Odo John Zimmerman, trans., The Fathers of the Church, 39 (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2002), 166–68, at 168. See also the edition, A. de Vogüé – P. Antin, eds. Grégoire Le Grand, “Dialogues,” Tome II, (Livres I-III), Sources chrétiennes, 260 (Paris, 1979), 384–90. The full text of Leander’s homily is in José Vives, Tomás Marín Martínez, and Gonzalo Martínez Díez, eds. Concilios Visigóticos e Hispano-Romanos. España Cristiana, Textos, 1 (Barcelona-Madrid, 1963), 139–44. A useful essay on this Dialogue is in O. García de la Fuente, “Leovigildo, Hermenegildo, Recaredo y Leandro en los Dialogi de Gregorio Magno,” in XIV Centenario del Concilio III de Toledo 589-1989, ed. Marcelo González Martín (Toledo: Arzobispado de Toledo, 1991), 393–402. See also Alberto Ferreiro, “Sanctissimus idem princeps sic venerandum concilium adloquitur dicens: King Reccared’s Discourses at the Third Council of Toledo (589),” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 46 (2014): 27–52. On Gregory the Great’s relevance see Teillet, Des Goths à la Nation Gothique, 335–66.
[23] Guido Donini and Gordon B. Ford, Jr., trans., Isidore of Seville. “History of the Goths, Vandals, and Suevi.” Second Revised Edition (Boston and Leiden: Brill, 1970), ch. 49, p. 23; Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 16–17.
[24] Donini and Ford, History, ch. 53, p. 25; Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 15.
[25] Galán Sánchez, El género historiográfico de la chronica, 111, a rich exposition is at 111–16.
[26] Álvarez Rubiano, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 16–17.
[27] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 50, Chronicon, p. 70; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 88; Álvarez Rubiano, 12, 4, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 31. For an instructive discussion of Liuvigild’s reign see Roger Collins, Visigothic Spain 409-711 (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 50–63.
[28] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 54, Chronicon, p. 71; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 89; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 12, 4, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 31.
[29] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 54, Chronicon, p. 71; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 89; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 13, 3, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 32.
[30] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 64, Chronicon, p. 73; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 91; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 16, 3, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 33.
[31] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 65, Chronicon, p. 73; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 91; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 17, 1, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 33.
[32] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 73, Chronicon, p. 75; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 93; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 19, 3, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 35.
[33] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 79, Chronicon, p. 77; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 94; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 20, 2, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 36.
[34] Consult for insightful commentary on Providence the work of Galán Sánchez, El género historiográfico de la chronica, 175–208, and Teillet, Des Goths à la Nation Gothique, 463–501 which includes the Third Council of Toledo (589).
[35] Cristóbal Rodríquez Alonso, ed. and trans., Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos de Isidoro de Sevilla. Colección Fuentes y Estudios de Historia Leonesa, 13 (León: Centro de Estudios e Investigación ‘San Isidoro’ Archivo Histórico Diocesano, 1975), ch. 6, pp. 180–81. This edition provides a useful apparatus that lists the corresponding references to Hydatius and other chroniclers, pp. 67–119. Donini and Ford, ch. 6, History, 4–5. For the background, Collins, Visigothic Spain 409-711, 11–37.
[36] Rodríquez Alonso, Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos, ch. 7, pp. 182–83; Donini and Ford, ch. 7, History, p. 5: “Valens autem a ueritate catholicae fidei deuius et Arrianae haeresis peruersitate detentus missis haereticis sacerdotibus Gothos persuasione nefanda sui erroris dogmati adgregauit et in tam praeclaram gentem uirus pestiferum semine pernicioso transfudit sicque errorem, quem recens credulitas ebibit, tenuit diuque seruauit.”
[37] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 8, pp. 182–86; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 8, pp. 5-6.
[38] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 8, pp. 184–85; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 8, p. 6.
[39] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 15, pp. 194–95; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 15, pp. 8–9.
[40] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” chs. 16–17, pp. 196–201; Donini and Ford, History, chs. 16–17, pp. 9–10.
[41] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 41, pp. 239–41; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 41, pp. 19–20.
[42] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 45, pp. 246–49; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 45, pp. 21–22.
[43] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 50, pp. 256–57; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 50, pp. 23–24.
[44] Libri historiarum, 8.46; Gregorii Episcopi Tvronensis, Libri historiarum X, MGH, 411–12. Thorpe, Gregory of Tours, 477: “Post haec Leuvigildus rex Hispanorum aegrotare coepit, sed, ut quidam adserunt, paenitentiam pro errore heretico agens et obstentas, ne huic heresi quisquam repperiretur consentaneus, in legem catholicam transiit, ac per septem dies in fletu perdurans pro his quae contra Deum iniquae molitus est, spiritum exalavit. Regnavitque Richaredus, filius eius, pro eo.”
[45] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” chs. 51–52, 53–54, pp. 258–65; Donini and Ford, History, chs. 51–52, 53–54, pp. 24–26.
[46] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” chs. 55–56, pp. 265–67; Donini and Ford, History, chs. 55–56, p. 26.
[47] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 55, pp. 264–67; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 55, p. 26.
[48] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 56, pp. 266–67; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 56, p. 26.
[49] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 52, pp. 260–61; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 52, pp. 24–25. Alberto Ferreiro, “The Theology and Typology of the Third Council of Toledo (589),” Annuarium Historia Conciliorum 40 (2008): 61–84, at 77.
[50] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” chs. 51 and 56, pp. 258–59 and 266–67; Donini and Ford, History, chs. 51 and 56, pp. 24 and 26.
[51] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” chs. 72–73, pp. 290–93; Donini and Ford, History, chs. 72–73, pp. 33–34.
[52] Rodríguez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 73, pp. 292–93. Donini and Ford, History, ch. 73, p. 34. For Hydatius see, “mox dei iudicio demone correptus interiit,” Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 88. Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. IIII, pp. 72–73: “Qui cum auctoritate regiae potestatis inreuerentes manus in basilicam Vincentii martyris ciuitatis ipsius in extendisset, mox dei iudicio in foribus templi daemonio correptus interiit.”
[53] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 74, pp. 294–95; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 74, pp. 34–35: “Gunderici succedit in regno annis XL, qui ex catholico effectus apostata in Arrianam fertur transisse perfidiam.”
[54] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 75, pp. 296–97; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 75, p. 35; Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius, 94; Campos, Cronicón de Idacio, ch. XV, pp. 82–83.
[55] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 78, pp. 300–01; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 78, p. 36.
[56] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 78, pp. 300–01; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 79 [78], p. 37. (This edition places it in chapter 79.)
[57] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 80, pp. 302–03; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 80, p. 37.
[58] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 81, pp. 302–05; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 81, p. 37.
[59] Rodríquez Alonso, Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos, ch. 82, pp. 304–05; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 82, pp. 37–38.
[60] The nine entries are commented upon in Ferreiro, “The Sueves in the Chronica of John of Biclaro,” 201–03.
[61] For a full treatment of the homily consult Alberto Ferreiro, “Quia pax et caritas facta est: Unity and Peace in Leander’s Homily at the Third Council of Toledo (589),” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 48 (2016-2017): 87–108.
[62] Alberto Ferreiro, “Braga and Tours: Some observations on Gregory’s De virtutibus sancti Martini (1.11),” Journal of Early Christian Studies 3.2 (1995): 195–210; Raymond Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles in Late Antique Gaul (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 211–13. Other important insights are in Teillet, Des Goths à la Nation Gothique, 367–420.
[63] Consult Alberto Ferreiro, “Discourse ‘Sermons’ in the Libri historiarum decem of Gregory of Tours,” Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 107 (2012): 49–77. In my article there is a complete collection of all references to Sueves and Visigoths in Gregory of Tours, Alberto Ferreiro, “The Sueve-Visigoth Iberian Kingdoms in Gregory of Tours,” Venti secoli di storiografia ecclesiastica. Bilancio e prospettive, Atti del XII Convegno Internazionale della Facoltà di Teologia. Pontificia Università della Santa Croce (Rome, 2008 [2010]), 279–91.
[64] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 86, pp. 312–13; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 86, p. 39.
[65] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 87, pp. 312–13; Donini and Ford, History, ch. 87, p. 40.
[66] Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 90, pp. 318–19; Donini and Ford, ch. 90, History, p. 41.
[67] Ferreiro, “Braga and Tours: Some observations on Gregory’s De virtutibus sancti Martini (1.11),” 195–210; Rodríquez Alonso, “Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos,” ch. 91, pp. 318–21; Donini and Ford, ch. 91, History, pp. 41–42.
[68] “Diu est, sanctissimi fratres, quia secundum instituta venerabilium canonum et decreta catholicae et apostolicae disciplinae desiderabamus sacerdotalem inter nos fieri debere conventum.” José Vives, Tomás Marín Martínez, and Gonzalo Martínez Díez, eds. Concilios Visigóticos e Hispano-Romanos. España Cristiana, Textos, 1 (Barcelona-Madrid, 1963), 65; José Orlandis and Domingo Ramos-Lissón, Historia de los Concilios de la España Romana y Visigoda (Pamplona, Ediciones Universidad de Navarra, 1986), 140.
[69] Cf. “Sanctissimus idem princeps sic venerandum concilium adloquitur dicens,” 39. I strongly suspect that these Arian bishops were not from Gallaecia: they were brought from outside Gallaecia and appointed by Liuvigild.
[70] Ferreiro, “Quia pax et caritas facta est,” 98–100. Teillet, Des Goths à la Nation Gothique, where Leander is treated throughout the volume.
[71] Cardelle de Hartmann and Collins, ch. 84, Chronicon, p. 78; Campos, Obispo de Gerona, 95; Álvarez Rubiano, ch. 21, 5, “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense,” 37. For a discussion of the homily see Francisco Javier Tovar Paz, Tractatus Sermones atque Homiliae: El cultivo del género literario del discurso homilético en la Hispania tardoantigua y visigoda. Anejos del Anuario de Estudios Filológicos, 15 (Cáceres: Universidad de Extremadura, 1994), 187–92.
[72] For details refer to Alberto Ferreiro, “The Omission of St. Martin of Braga in John of Biclaro’s Chronica and the Third Council of Toledo,” Los Visigodos. Historia y Civilización. Actas de la Semana Internacional de Estudios Visigóticos, October 21-25, 1985 (Madrid. Universidad de Murcia, 1986), 145–48.
[73] Rodríquez Alonso, Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos, De laude Spania, 168–71; the translation is from Donini and Ford, History, ch. 4, p. 2.
[74] Pierre Riché. Education and Culture in the Barbarian West, Sixth Through Eighth Centuries. John J. Contreni (trans.) S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1976. Yitzhak Hen. Roman Barbarians: The Royal Court and Culture in the Early Medieval West. (Medieval Culture and Society.) Basingstoke, Eng., and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Bibliography
Álvarez Rubiano, Pablo. “La Crónica de Juan Biclarense. Versión castellana y notas para su estudio.” Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 16 (1943): 7–44.
Burgess, R.W., ed. The Chronicle of Hydatius and the “Consularia Constatinopolitana.” Two Contemporary Accounts of the Final Years of the Roman Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.
Campos, Julio. Cronicón de Idacio, Obispo de Chaves (s. IV-V). Salamanca: Ediciones Calasancias, 1984.
Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen, and Roger Collins, eds. Iohannis Biclarensis “Chronicon.” Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 173A. Turnhout: Brepols, 2001.
Collins, Roger. Visigothic Spain 409-711. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.
Díaz, Pablo C. El Reino Suevo (411-585). Akal Universitaria, Serie Reinos y Dominios en la Historia de España, 312. Madrid: Ediciones Akal, 2011.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “Quia pax et caritas facta est: Unity and Peace in Leander’s Homily at the Third Council of Toledo (589).” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 48 (2016-2017): 87–108.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “Sanctissimus idem princeps sic venerandum concilium adloquitur dicens: King Reccared’s Discourses at the Third Council of Toledo (589).” Annuarium Historia Conciliorum 46 (2014): 27–52.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “Discourse ‘Sermons’ in the Libri historiarum decem of Gregory of Tours.” Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 107 (2012): 49–77.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “The Sueve-Visigoth Iberian Kingdoms in Gregory of Tours.” Venti secoli di storiografia ecclesiastica. Bilancio e prospettive. Atti del XII Convegno Internazionale della Facoltà di Teologia. Pontificia Università della Santa Croce. Rome, March 13-14, 2008 (2010): 279–91.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “The Theology and Typology of the Third Council of Toledo (589).” Annuarium Historia Conciliorum 40 (2008): 61–84.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “The Sueves in the Chronica of John of Biclaro.” Latomus. Revue d’études latines 46 (1987): 201–03.
Ferreiro, Alberto. “The Omission of St. Martin of Braga in John of Biclaro’s Chronica and the Third Council of Toledo.” Los Visigodos. Historia y Civilización. Actas de la Semana Internacional de Estudios Visigóticos. October 21-25, 1985. Madrid. Universidad de Murcia, 1986.
Galán Sánchez, Pedro Juan. El género historiográfico de la chronica. Las crónicas hispanas de época visigoda. Anejo Anuario de Estudios Filológicos, 12. Cáceres: Universidad de Extremadura, 1994.
García de la Fuente, O. “Leovigildo, Hermenegildo, Recaredo y Leandro en los Dialogi de Gregorio Magno,” in XIV Centenario del Concilio III de Toledo 589-1989, edited by Marcelo González Martín, 393–402. Toledo: Arzobispado de Toledo, 1991.
Gregorii Episcopi Tvronensis, Libri historiarum X. Monumenta Germaniae Historica 1.1. Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum. Hanover, 1951.
Hen, Yitzhak. Roman Barbarians: The Royal Court and Culture in the Early Medieval West. Medieval Culture and Society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Orlandis, José, and Domingo Ramos-Lissón. Historia de los Concilios de la España Romana y Visigoda. Pamplona: Ediciones Universidad de Navarra, 1986.
Reinhart, Wilhelm. Historia General del Reino Hispánico de los Suevos. Publicaciones del Seminario de Historia Primitiva del Hombre, monografías 1. Madrid, 1952.
Riché, Pierre, trans. John J. Contreni. Education and Culture in the Barbarian West, Sixth Through Eighth Centuries. Charleston: University of South Carolina Press, 1976.
Rodríquez Alonso, Cristóbal, ed. and trans. Las Historias de los Godos, Vandalos y Suevos de Isidoro de Sevilla. Colección ‘Fuentes y Estudios de Historia Leonesa,’ 13. León: Centro de Estudios e Investigación ‘San Isidoro’ Archivo Histórico Diocesano, 1975.
Thorpe, Lewis. Gregory of Tours. The History of the Franks. London-New York: Penguin Books, 1974.
Torres Rodríguez, Casimiro. El Reino de los Suevos. Colección ‘Galicia Histórica’ Fundación Barrie de la Maza. Fundación Barrié de la Maza. A Coruña, 1977.
Tovar Paz, Francisco Javier. Tractatus Sermones Atque Homiliae: El cultivo del género literario del discurso homilético en la Hispania tardoantigua y visigoda. Anejos del Anuario de Estudios Filológicos, 15. Cáceres: Universidad de Extremadura, 1994.
Van Dam, Raymond. Saints and Their Miracles in Late Antique Gaul. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1993.
Vives, José, Tomás Marín Martínez, and Gonzalo Martínez Díez., eds. Concilios Visigóticos e Hispano-Romanos. España Cristiana, Textos, 1. Barcelona-Madrid, 1963.
Vogüé de, A. and P. Antin, eds. Grégoire Le Grand. “Dialogues.” Tome II (Livres I-III). Sources chrétiennes, 260. Paris: Éditions du Cerf 1979.
Zimmerman, O.J., trans. Pope Gregory the Great. Dialogues. The Fathers of the Church, 39. Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2002.
Visigothic Symposia 