Flavius Merobaudes

Flavius Merobaudes: A Translation and Historical Commentary
Author(s): Frank M. Clover and Flavius Merobaudes

Source: Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 61, No. 1 (1971), pp. 1-78
Published by: American Philosophical Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1006125
Accessed: 12-03-2018 13:36 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
American Philosophical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
This content downloaded from 149.156.89.220 on Mon, 12 Mar 2018 13:36:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
TRANSACT IONS
OF THE
AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

HELD AT PHILADELPHIA
FOR PROMOTING USEFUL KNOWLEDGE
NEW SERIES-VOLUME 61, PART 1
1971
FLAVIUS MEROBAUDES
A Translation and Historical Commentary
FRANK M. CLOVER
Assistant Professor of History and Classics, University of Wisconsin
THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

INDEPENDENCE S3QUARE
PHILADELPHI A
JANUARY, 1971
TO THE CLOVERS AND THE WAGNERS
Copyright ? 1971 by The American Philosophical Society
Library of Congress Catalog

Card Number 75-143266
PREFACE
In his masterful commentary on the panegyrics of The preparation of my translation and commentary
Sidonius Apollinaris, Andre Loyen has occasion to falls into two stages. I began my investigation in 1962
remark on the historical value of the fragments of as a Master of Arts project at the University of
Flavius Merobaudes, another late Roman panegyrist. Chicago. Upon completion of my Ph.D. I resumed
To Loyen, Merobaudes' poetic panegyric (Panegyric work at the University of Wisconsin in early 1967. In
II) contains some useful historical information, but the first stage Professors Richard T. Bruere and
the work is "extremely difficult" to interpret.' My Edward L. Bassett of the University of Chicago
own attempt to grapple with Merobaudes as a histori- advised me in the preparation of the translation. At
cal source bears out the accuracy of Loyen's statement the second stage Professor John P. Heironimus of the
not only for Panegyric II but also for the rest of University of Wisconsin and an anonymous reader for
Merobaudes' secular works. Our present knowledgethe of American Philosophical Society made many help-
the fifth century is limited, but Merobaudes com- ful suggestions regarding the revised translation which
pounds the difficulty of interpretation by making his appears in the following pages. During the second
remarks immediately comprehensible to only a small phase Professors Charles F. Edson and Friedrich
circle of his contemporaries. In order to elucidate the Solmsen of the University of Wisconsin and Professors
evidence he conveys as effectively as possible, I have Bruere and Walter E. Kaegi, also of the University
found it both necessary and desirable to render all ofof Chicago, presented helpful criticisms of various
his surviving works into English. To my knowledge parts of my work, notably the commentary. Mr.
I present the first complete translation of Merobaudes'John R. Martindale of Jesus College, Cambridge
fragments into English, and the second into a modern University, kindly sent me the evidence for Mero-
language.2 In instances where more than one rendi- baudes' career available to the editors of the forth-
tion of a passage is possible, I have offered the version coming Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire.
I prefer in the translation, and discussed the alterna- My wife, Dorothy Helen, and her parents, Mr. and
tives in the commentary. For the translation I have Mrs. Walter S. Wagner, helped proofread my work and
followed the text of Vollmer, the most recent editor of offered some suggestions regarding its content. My
all that survives of Merobaudes. For the reader's debt of gratitude at the second stage of preparation
convenience I have included Vollmer's text without encompasses not only individuals but also foundations
apparatus in an appendix. In writing the historical and organizations. The University of Wisconsin
commentary I have adopted the format of Loyen Graduate School made available funds for summer
rather than that, for example, selected by Walbank for 1967 which permitted me to do a significant amount of
his commentary on Polybius. I found that it was research at the libraries of the British M1useum, the
easier to sort out a poet's jumble of information by Senate House of the University of London and the
composing an interpretive essay rather than a line-by- Institute of Classical Studies. A joint grant of the
line commentary. Like Sidonius, M\Jerobaudes is worthAmerican Philosophical Society and the University of
special historical attention. Although the collective Wisconsin Graduate School enabled me to write a
observations on his works by previous students are first draft of the commentary during the summer of
valuable, I believe that many important aspects of his 1968. Part of this work has already received a public
compositions have gone unnoticed. A word must be hearing. I presented a portion of my commentary on
said about the De Christo. Its contents are primarily ofPanegyric I at the Fourth Biennial Conference on
interest to the church historian. Because of the scope Medieval Studies, held at Western Michigan Univ-
of my own work I have simply translated the poem ersity (Kalamazoo) on 13-15 March, 1968. The
without commenting on it. In general, this piece has paper, entitled "Toward an Understanding of Mero-
received excellent attention from Salvatore Gennaro.3 baudes' Panegyric I," will appear in a forthcoming
volume of Historia (Wiesbaden).
Finally, I wish to express special thanks to my
1 Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 25.
teacher, Professor Stewart Irvin Oost of the University
2 The first complete translation is that of Olajos, Antik Tanul-
manyok 13 (1966): pp. 172-188. Because I cannot read Hun-of Chicago. Professor Oost suggested an investigation
of Merobaudes to me in the autumn of 1962, and he
garian, I have been able to note only some of the main points of
Mrs. Olajos' interpretation. I am grateful to Mr. Lajos Biro,has counseled me at both stages of preparation. His
a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin, for trans-expert advice, like that of the others previously men-
lating the article for me.
tioned, has helped me avoid numerous errors of fact
3 Gennaro, Da Claudiano a Merobaude (Catania, 1959). The
De Christo has been edited most recently by F. Bucheler and A. and interpretation. Any mistakes which remain in
Riese, Anthologia latina sive poesis latinae supplementum (2 v., the following pages are entirely my own.
2nd ed. of vol. 1, Leipzig, 1894-1926) 1, 2: pp. 327-328, no. 878. F. M. C.
ABBREVIATIONS
Only abbreviations of late Roman and medieval sources are De mir. Germ. Migne, J. P. (ed.). Herici monachi
given here. Standard abbreviations of classical sources are antissiodorensis De miraculis S.
omitted. Square brackets in some of the footnotes enclose the Germani. PL 124 (1852): pp.1207-
pagination of certain sources which can only be found in cumber- 1270.
some collections such as the Patrologia latina. Evagr. Bidez, J., and Parmentier, L. (eds.).
The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius
Adnot. ad cyclos dionys. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Adnotationes with the Scholia (London, 1898).
antiquiores ad cyclos dionysianos. Fredegar. Krusch, B. (ed.). Chronicarum quae
Chron. min. 1 (1892): pp. 751-756. dicuntur Fredegarii Scholastici libri
Agnellus Testi-Rasponi, A. (ed.). Agnelli Liber IV. MGH:SRM2 (1888): pp. 1-193.
pontificalis. Codex pontificalis ec- Greg. Tur. HF Buchner, R. (ed.). Gregorii episcopi
clesiae Ravennatis. Rerum italicarum
turonensis Historiarum libri decem. (2
scriptores (Bologna, 1924) (2, part
v. Berlin, 1956).
3, fasc. 1-3.)
Hydat. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Hydatii lemici
Aug. De civ. Dei Sancti Aurelii Augustini De civitate
Continuatio chronicorum hierony-
Dei libri XXII. Corpus christi-
mianorum ad a. CCCCLX VIII.
anorum: Series latina 47-48 (1955).
Chron. min. 2 (1894): pp. 1-36.
Aug. Ep. Goldacher, A. (ed.). S. Aureli August-
ii hipponiensis episcopi epistulae.
Isid. Hist. Goth. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Isidori iunioris
Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum
episcopi hispalensis Historia Gotho-
latinorum 57 (1911). (Part of a
rum Wandalorum Sueborum ad a.
multi-volume edition.)
DCXXI V. Chron. min. 2 (1894):
Auson. Grat. act. Schenkl, C. (ed.). D. Magni Ausonji pp. 241-303.
Gratiarum actio dicta Domino Grati-
Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins. Boor, C. de (ed.). Excerpta historica
ano Augusto. MGH:AA 5, 2 (1883):
iussu Imp. Constantini Porphyro-
pp. 19-30.
geniti confecta 3: Excerpta de insidiis
Boethius Migne, J. P. (ed.). Manlii Severini (Berlin, 1905), pp. 58-150 (Johannes
Boetii opera omnia. PL 63 (1847):
Antiochenus).
pp. 537-1364, and 64 (1847).
Jord. Get. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Jordanis De
Cassiod. Chron. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Cassiodori
origine actibusque Getarum. MGH:
Senatoris Chronica ad a. DXIX.
AA 5, 1 (1882): pp. 53-138.
Chron. min. 2 (1894): pp. 109-161.
Jord. Rom. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Jordanis De
Cassiod. Var. Mornmsen, Th. (ed.). Cassiodori
summa temporum vel origine acti-
Senatoris Variae. MfGH:AA 12
busque Romanorum. MGH:AA 5, 1
(1894): pp. 1-385.
(1882): pp. 1-52.
Cedrenus Bekker, I. (ed.). Georgii Cedreni His-
Laterc. reg. Wand. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Laterculus regum
toriarum compendium. CSHB 34-35
Wandalorum et Alanorum. Chron.
(1838-1839).
min. 3 (1898): pp. 456-460.
Chron. Gall. M\4ommsen, Th. (ed.). Chronica gallica.
Chron. min. 1 (1892): pp. 615-666. Lib. hist. Franc. Krusch, B. (ed.). Liber historiae
Francorum. MGH:SRM 2 (1888):
Chron. min. 1, 2 and 3 Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Chronica minora
pp. 215-328.
saec. IV, V, VI, VII. 3 v. MGH:AA
9 (1892), 11 (1894), 13 (1898). L. Burg. De Salis, L. (ed.). Leges Burgundionum.
Chron. Pasch. Dindorf, L. (ed.). Chronicon paschale. Monumenta Germaniae historica,
CSHB 16-17 (1832).
legum sec/io 1: Leges nationum ger-
manicarum 2, 1 (1892): pp. 29-116.
Claud. Birt, Th. (ed.). Claudii Claudiani
carmina. MGH:AA 10 (1892). Malal. Dindorf, L. (ed.). Johannis Malalae
Cod. Just. Kruger, P. (ed.). Corpus iuris civilis 2: Chronographia. CSHB 15 (1831).
Codex justinianus (Berlin, 1959; Marcell. Com. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Marcellini v.c.
reprint). comitis Chronicon. Chron. min. 2
Cod. Theod. Mommsen, Th., and Meyer, P. (eds.). (1894): pp. 37-108.
Theodosiani libri XVI cum con- Marc.diac. V. Porphyrii Gregoire, H., and Kugener, M. A.
stitutionibus sirmondianis et leges (eds.). Marc le Diacre: Vie de
novellae ad Theodosianum pertinentes Porphyre, eveque de Gaza (Paris,
(2 v. Berlin, 1905). 1930).
Cons. Constant. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Consularia con- Merob. Vollmer, F. (ed.). Fl. Merobaudis
stantinopolitana. Chron. min. 1 reliquiae. MGH:AA 14 (1905): pp.
(1892): pp. 197-247. 1-20.
Cons. Ital. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Consularia MGH:AA Monumenta Germaniae historica: Auc-
italica. Chron. min. 1 (1892): pp. tores antiquissimi (15 v., Berlin,
249-339. 1877-1919).
CIL Corpus inscriptionum latinarum (16 v., MGH:Scriptores Monumenta Germaniae historica: Scrip-
Berlin, 1863-1959). tores (32 v., Hannover, 1826-1934).
CSHB Niebuhr, B. G., et al. (eds.). Corpus MGH :SRM Monumenta Germaniae historica: Scrip-
scriptorum historiae byzantinae (50 tores rerum merovingicarumn. (7 v.,
v. Bonn, 1828-1897). Hannover, 1885-1919).
6 CLOVER: FLAVIUS MEROBAUDES [TRANS. AMER. PHIL. SOC.
Niceph. Migne, J. P. (ed.). Nicephori Callisti Rutil. Namat. Castorina, E. (ed.). Claudio Rutilio
Historia ecclesiastica. PG 145 (1865): Namaziano: De reditu (Florence,
pp. 557-1332; 146 (1865): pp. 1967).
9-1274; 147: pp. 9-448. Salv. De gub. Dei Pauly, F. (ed.). Salviani de guber-
Nov. Leon. Noailles, P., and Dain, A. (eds.). Les natione Dei libri VIII. Corpus script-
novelles de Leon VI le Sage (Paris, orum ecclesiasticorum latinorum 8
1944). (1883), pp. 1-200.
Nov. Val. Meyer, P., and Mommsen, Th. (eds.). Salv. Ep. Pauly (ed.). Salviani Epistolae. Ibid.,
Leges novellae Divi Valentiniani pp. 201-223.
Augusti. Cod. Theod. 2 (1905): pp. Sidon. Carm. Loyen, A. (ed.). Sidoine Apollinaire:
69-154. Poemes. 1 (Paris, 1960).
Oros. Zangemeister, C. (ed.). Pauli Orosii Sidon. Ep. Anderson, W. B. (ed.). Sidonius Apol-
Historiarum adversum paganos libri linaris: Poems and Letters 2 (Cam-
VII. Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasti- bridge, Mass., 1965); and Loyen
corum latinorum 5 (1882): pp. 1-600. (ed.). Sidoine Apollinaire: Lettres 2
Pan. lat. Mynors, Sir R. (ed.). XII panegyrici and 3 (Paris, announced in 1969).
latini (Oxford, 1964). Sigebertus gemblacensis Bethmann, L. (ed.). Sigeberti gem-
PG Migne, J. P. (ed.). Patrologiae cursus blacensis Chronographia. MGH:
completus: Series graeca (162 v., Scriptores 6 (1844): pp. 268-374.
Paris, 1857-1912). Socrat. Migne, J. P. (ed.). Socratis scholastici
PL Migne, J. P. (ed.). Patrologiae cursus Historia ecclesiastica. PG 67 (1864):
completus: Series latina (221 v., pp. 29-842.
Paris, 1844-1864). Suda Adler, A. (ed.). Suidae Lexikon (5 v.,
Paul. Diac. Hist. Rom. Crivellucci, A. (ed.). Pauli Diaconi Leipzig, 1928-1938).
Historia romana (Rome, 1914). Symmachus Seeck, 0. (ed.). Q. Aurelii Symmachi
Polemius Silvius Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Polemii Silvii quae supersunt. MGH:AA 6, 1
Laterculus. Chron. min. 1 (1892): pp. (1883).
511-551. Theophan. Boor, C. de (ed.). Theophanis Chrono-
Prisc. Exc. de leg. Rom. Boor, C. de (ed.). Excerpta historica graphia (2 v., Leipzig, 1883-1885).
iussu Imp. Constantini Porphyro- Vict. Vit. Petschenig, M. (ed.). Victoris episcopi
geniti confecta 1, 1: Excerpta de vitensis Historia persecutionis afri-
legationibus Romanorum ad gentes canae provinciae. Corpus scriptorum
(Berlin, 1903), pp. 121-155 ecclessiaticorum latinorum 7 (1881):
(Priscus). pp. 1-107.
Prisc. Exc. de leg. gent. Boor, C. de (ed.). Ibid. 1, 2: Excerpta Vit. Germ. Borius, R. (ed.). Constance de Lyon:
de legationibus gentium ad Romanos Vie de Saint Germain d'Auxerre.
(Berlin, 1903), pp. 575-591 Sources chretiennes 112 (Paris,
(Priscus). 1965).
Procop. Bell. Vand. Haury, J., and Wirth, G. (eds.). Vit. met. Germ. Migne, J. P. (ed.). Herici monachi antis-
Procopii caesariensis opera omnia 1: siodorensis Vita S. Germani de prosa
De bello vandalico (Leipzig, 1963), in metrum transfusa. PL 124 (1852):
pp. 305-552. pp. 1131-1208.
Prosp. Mommsen, Th. (ed.). Prosperi Tironis Vit. Mel. (graec.) Gorce, D. (ed.). Vie de Sainte Melanie.
Epitoma chronicon. Chron. min. 1 Sources chretiennes 90 (Paris, 1962).
(1892): pp. 341-499. Vit. Mel. (lat.) Smet, C. de, et al. (eds.). "Vita Sanctae
Pseudo-Dexter Migne, J. P. (ed.). Flavii Lucii Dextri Melaniae Iunioris auctore coaevo et
barcinonensis Chronicon omnimodae sanctae familiari," A nalecta boll-
historiae. PL 31 (1846): pp. 9-635. andiana 8 (1889): pp. 16-63.
Querolus Ermich, W. (ed.). Griesgram oder die Zonaras Pinder, M., and Biittner-Wobst, T.
Geschichte vom Topf: Querolus sive (eds.). Johannis Zonarae Epitome
Aulularia (Berlin, 1965). historiarum. CSHB 44-46 (1841-
RE Pauly, A. von, Wissowa, G., et al. 1897).
(eds.). Real-Encyclopddie der classi- Zosim. Mendelssohn, L. (ed.). Zosimi comitis
schen Altertumswissenschaft (Stutt- et exadvocatifisci Historia nova (Leip-
gart, 1893-). zig, 1887).
FLAVIUS MEROBAUDES
A Translation and Historical Commentary
FRANK M. CLOVER
CONTENTS partly because of our limited knowledge of the fifth

PAGE century, and partly because of the rhetorician's
Preface .............................................. 3 attempts to make his remarks immediately under-
standable to a limited audience. To add to the
Abbreviations ......................................... 5
difficulty of historical interpretation, most of the
Introduction .......................................... 7
orator's works survive in one mutilated manuscript-
Translation: the Codex sangallensis 908, a palimpsest of the fifth or
Carmen I .......................................... 11 sixth century.2 But once Merobaudes' works have
Carmen II ......................................... 11 received proper attention, they provide a rare view of
Carmen III ........................................ 11 the period in which the orator lived. They enable one
Carmen IV ......................................... 11 to look rather closely, for example, at the lives of the
Panegyric I ......................................... 12 Western Emperor Valentinian III, his immediate
Panegyric II ........................................ 13 family and such high-ranking officials as his general-
Commentary: issimo Flavius Aetius. In many cases one cannot
Carmen I .......................................... 16 find Merobaudes' perspectives in other contemporary
Carmen I I . ......................................... 2 7 evidence, such as the short, pithy chronicles.
Carmen III ........................................ 28 Little is known about the life and career of Mero-
Carmen IV ......................................... 29 baudes. His name indicates that he was a Frank in
Panegyric I ........................................ 32 origin.3 The sources speak of his noble ancestry,
Panegyric II ....................................... 41 thereby suggesting that he descended from a Frankish
nobleman or a Romanized Frank who attained high
Appendix: Vollmer's text of Merobaudes ................. 60
office in the Roman state. Perhaps Merobaudes was
Bibliography of secondary works ........................ 70
related in some way to a Frankish officer of the same
Index .............................................. 75 name who flourished during the reigns of the Emperors
Valentinian I and Gratian, and who attained the
INTRODUCTION consulate in 377 and 383.4 Another indication of the
poet-orator's Frankish background comes from Nicolas
In attempting to reconstruct the events of a parti- Camuzat, an ecclesiastical writer of the late sixteenth
cular era, the historian generally prefers contemporary and early seventeenth centuries. In one of his com-
to non-contemporary evidence. The latter, whether positions Camuzat mentions a donation of property
it be a historical narrative or not, may present a more to the monastery of Mantaniacum (Mantenay-sur-
coherent picture of past happenings, but it often colors Seine, near Troyes) by a patrician Merobaudes. This
such occurrences with the values of the period in which Merobaudes is probably the poet, and his possession
it is recorded. The former, on the other hand, is of property in northern Gaul suggests that he was a
usually harder to interpret. Such contemporary Romanized Frank.5
testimony as a grave stone, a business record, or even
a history, may contain allusions and references not 2 Cf. Zangemeister and Wattenbach, Exempta codicum lati-
immediately comprehensible to the later student. norum (Heidelberg, 1879), p. 5 and table LI; F. Vollmer,
MGH:AA 14 (1905): pp. i-iv; and Lowe, Codices latini anti-
But once it is properly interpreted, contemporary
quiores (11 v. to date, Oxford, 1934-1966) 7: no. 962.
evidence yields a truer picture of its own period. 3 Cf. M. Schonfeld, Worterbuch (Heidelberg, 1911), s.v. "Mero-
It is the purpose of this work to investigate one baudes," p. 167.
such genre of contemporary documentation-court 4 For the consular Merobaudes, cf. W. Ensslin, s.v. "Mero-
literature; in particular, to examine the historical baudes" (1), RE 15, 1 (1931): pp. 1038-1039. For the rheto-
rician's noble parentage, cf. CIL 6: no. 1724: "in viro antiquae
value of the court poetry and oratory of Flavius nobilitatis"; Hydat. 128 [MGH:AA 11 = Chron. min. 2: p. 24]:
Merobaudes, a mediocre rhetorician who lived in the "natu nobilis"; Lot, Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire 17
last century of the Western Roman Empire.' The (1938): p. 910; and Sundwall, Westrdmische Studien (Berlin,
allusions in Merobaudes' compositions are obscure, 1915), no. 314, p. 106. Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961),
p. 355, n. 6, sees in Hydatius' testimony a reference to Merobaudes'
I For the life and works of Merobaudes in general, see Schanz, descent from a noble Spanish family. It is true that Merobaudes
Hosius and Kruger, Geschichte der romischen Litteratur (Munich, had Spanish connections (see below), but his name itself does not
1920) 4, 2: pp. 41-43; Lenz, s.v. "Merobaudes" (3), RE 15, 1 suggest ultimate Spanish origins.
(1931): pp. 1039-1047; and Stroheker, Germanentum (Zurich, 6 Cf. Lot, Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire 17 (1938): pp.
1965), pp. 74-75. 906-911; and Prinz, Friihes Monchtum (Munich, 1965), pp. 70-71.
7
But if the rhetorician Merobaudes was Frankish by did not preserve all the traditions of its counterpart of
descent, he was certainly a resident of Spain. Sidonius the Principate; it was, for instance, heavily Chris-
Apollinaris refers to a man of letters who is probably tianized. The surviving works of Merobaudes show
Merobaudes, and whose homeland is the Baetis River that he adopted many of the attitudes of this hybrid
in Spain.6 The sixteenth-century classicist Georg nobility. His outlook was generally that of a seniator,
Fabricius attributes a poem on the Christ to a " Mero- and he was a devout Christian.10
baudes hispanus scholasticus." There is general But Merobaudes did not conform entirely to the
agreement that the attribution is correct, and that this general behavior pattern of the Spanish upper class.
Merobaudes is the Frankish rhetorician.7 Mero- Since the beginning of the fifth century the aristocracy
baudes' father-in-law Asturius xvas possibly a resident had experienced many difficulties from barbarian
of Hispania Tarraconensis.8 Finally, the fact that the invasions and peasant disturbances, and thus did not
imperial government gave Mlerobaudes himself a regularly take an active part in public life." AMero-
military command in Spain suggests that the orator- baudes, on the other hand, conceived a strong interest
poet had some previous acquaintance with the in public affairs. Sometime before 435 he left his
peninsula.9 residence in Spain and journeyed to Ravenna."
The documentation under consideration here per- There-and in Rome he began to employ his literary
mits only a tentative reconstruction of Mlerobaudes' talents primarily for the glory of the Emperor Val-
early career. The rhetorician was a Romanized Frank entinian III, the imperial family and the West's chief
of high birth, perhaps originally from Gaul. Early in general, Flavius Aetius. He also embarked on a public
his life he apparently moved to Spain and settled along career at this time.
the Baetis River. There he seems to have married It will be useful to consider the range of Alerobaudes'
into the old senatorial aristocracy of Spain. This vas literary activity during his entire career, for the per-
not unusual, for in Merobaudes' time the aristocracy, spective one obtains from his surviving works may be
which controlled large estates in the Iberian Peninsula, misleading. The compositions preserved in the Codex
was finding it necessary to take in distinguished new sangallensis 908 and the independently transmitted
elements in order to maintain its old way of life. poem on the Christ show clearly that M\Ierobaudes vas
Naturally the Spanish upper class of late antiquity a fairly competent man of letters. He could vrite a
reasonably good hexameter, elegaic couplet, or a line
Prinz tentatively dates Merobaudes' donation to ca. 445, in and the Phalaecean meter. Furthermore, he could com-
suggests that the rhetorician was a close friend of Lupus, Bishop
of Troyes. The testimony of Camuzat will receive fuller discus- pose a tolerable prose oration." The substance of his
sion below, pp. 35-36. surviving works shows that his primary goal vas to
6 Sidon. Carm. IX 296-301. Sirmond, Sidonii opera (Paris, praise. His poem on the Christ, for example, is a
1614), "Notae ad Sidonium," pp. 235-236, was the first to identifyeulogy.'4 In this context one mnight thinik of him
Merobaudes as the poet referred to in this passage.
primarily as a court poet and orator. Indeed,
7Fabricius, Opera christiana (Basel, 1564), p. 87, ad pp.
763-766: "Merobaudis Hispani Scholastici carmen de Christo Merobaudes' contemporaries seem to have emiiphasized
transscripsimus e libro antiquo, quem ad nos Oporinus misit." this aspect of his career."5 But there is evidence
In an earlier edition Camers, Claudiani opera (1510), quat. C fol. indicating that he did not restrict his literary efforts to
II and fol. F III, attributes the same poem to Claudian. Most court compositions. An inscriptioni honorinig him in
editors assign the work to the rhetorician Merobaudes. See esp.
435 makes repeated allusions to his general learning
Jeep, Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie, ser. 2, 28 (1873): pp.
299-304; and Geniiaro, Da Claudiano a AMerobaude (Catania, anid his excellent talenits as a rhetoriciani. Fabricius
1959), pp. 24-55, et passim.
8 Hydat. 125, 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]. Sirago, Galla 10 Cf. Merob. Passin. For the Spaniish aristocracy of late
Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 384, maintains that Asturius was a antiquity and Merobaudes' place in it, cf. Balil, Latomus 24
(1965): pp. 886-904, esp. pp. 889-890; anid Stroheker, Germanen-
large landowner of Hispania Tarraconensis. This identification is
not certain. Stroheker, Germanentum (Zurich, 1965), p. 75,tum (Zuirich, 1965), pp. 54-87, esp. pp. 74-75. For Merobaudes'
observes that there is iio explicit evidence for the ultimate Christian leanings, cf. Geinnaro, Da Claudiano a Merobaude
Spanish origins of any high-ranking officials of the middle fifth(Catania, 1959), passini.
century. In support of Sirago, however, one may note that the C' Cf. Stroheker, Germanentunm (Zurich, 1965), pp. 75 anid 77.
name Asturius recalls Asturia, a district in northwestern Hispania 12 Cf. Sidon. Carm. IX 297-298.
Tarraconensis. Cf. E. Hiibner, s.v. "Asturia," RE 2, 2 (1896): 13 Panegyric II anid the De Christo are written in hexameters.
pp. 1863-1864. Carmina I, II and III are composed in elegaic couplets. Mero-
9 Hydat. 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]. It is interesting to note
baudes used the Phalacean meter for Carmien IV. Panegyric I is
that the chronicle of the Pseudo-Dexter also indicates Mero-a prose orationi.
baudes' Spanish connections. The Pseudo-Dexter s.a. 423 [PL14 For the panegyrical nature of the De Christo, cf. Jeep,
Rheinisches
31: pp. 555-5561 notes that a poet "Marabaudes" flourished in Museum fiir Philologie ser. 2, 28 (1873): p. 301.
11 Hydat. 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]: "maxime in poematis
Barcelona. Unfortunately this testimony is worthless, for the
studio;" Sidon. Carm. IX 296-301; CIL 6: no. 1724: "Aliorum
entire chronicle is a forgery of Hieronymus Rom'an de la Higuera,
a Jesuit from Toledo who died in 1611. Cf. Antonio, Bibliothecafacta laudare praecipuo," "remuneraintes in viro . . . carmen";
hispana (Rome, 1696) 1: pp. 191-192, 239-240; Potthast, Biblio-CIL 6: no. 31983, frg. a: "[car]mina," frg. b: "orator." Even the
theca historica medii aevi (Berlin, 1896) 1: pp. 375-376, s.v. spurious testimon-y of the Pseudo-Dexter, s.a. 423 [PL 31: pp.
"Dexter"; and Juilicher, s.v. "Dexter" (11), RE 5, 1 (1903): 555-556], fits the general picture of Merobaudes' poetic ability:
p. 297. Merobaudes is a "blinid [sic] lyric poet."
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 19711 INTRODUCTION 9
refers to him as "scholasticus"-possibly one engaged that he held a military command.21 Thein he ad-
in the study of rhetoric. Finally, in his Commentary vanced to the second senatorial rank, that of vir spec-
on the Topics of Cicero Boethius discusses some highly tabilis. Perhaps simultaneously the Emperor Valen-
technical points of rhetoric and philosophy, and cites tinian III made him Count of the Consistory, the
as one of his authorities a " Merobaudes rhetor"-quite imperial advisory council. Mlembership in the Con-
possibly the M\lerobaudes currently under considera- sistory presumably afforded him the additional title
tion.16 In view of the above testimony it seems likely of comes primi ordinis. iMierobaudes' ability as a
that Merobaudes was not only a court poet and orator, rhetorician may have gained him admission to this
but also a scholar and rhetorician.17 council. It was partially a high court of law, and
The earliest compositions of Merobaudes have not emperors sometimes selected rhetoricians to serve as
survived, but it is conceivable that he delivered a law officers. But given the military direction of the
panegyric, perhaps in verse, celebrating the first, orator's official career, the fact that he was at once vir
stormy consulate of Aetius in 432.18 In addition to spectabilis and Count of the Consistory may indicate
displaying his literary talents to the elite, he gave proof that he had previously held the military command of
of his prowess as a soldier. Sometime before July, comes rei militaris or dux.22 Finally, on 30 July, 435,
435, he fought a campaign in the Alps, perhaps against the City of Rome and the Emperor Valentinian III
the Bacaudae, a conglomerate of dissidents operating honored Merobaudes by having a bronze statue of
partly on the western slope of this massif.19 him erected in the Forum of Trajan.23
As a result of his military and literary endeavors, After receiving this honor 1Ierobaudes seems to
1\Ierobaudes received many offices and honors prior to have devoted the next seven or eight years of his life to
30 July, 435. He gained co-optation into the Senate, literary activity. It is possible that he delivered a
where at first he presumably held the rank of vir panegyric honoring Atius' second consulate in 437.24
clarissimus, the lowest order for a senator.20 He It is also possible that he composed an ode in 437
earned the name "Flavius," which probably indicates honoring the wedding of Valentinian III and
Theodosius II's daughter Eudoxia. In the following
16 CIL 6: no. 1724: "Docto viro," "eloquentiae cura," "in-
genium . . . doctrinae natum," "scholari . . . otio"; Fabricius, year the poet may have produced some verses celebrat-
Opera christiana (Basel, 1564), p. 87, ad pp. 763-766; cf. Hydat. ing the birth of Eudocia, the imperial couple's first
128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]: "eloquentiae merito." Jeep, Rhein- child.25 Many of Mlerobaudes' surviving works date
isches Museum fur Philologie, ser. 2, 28 (1873): p. 301, maintains from this period as well. Around winter 441/2 the
that Fabricius' "scholasticus" is to be taken in the ancient sense
as meaning "rhetorician"; he cites the phrase "otium scholare" poet wrote a genethliakon in honor of the first birthday
in the inscription cited above to support his interpretation. But of Atius' younger son Gaudentius. In the early 440's
Fabricius is not an ancient authority, and he could use the word he dedicated a piece to his friend Anicius Acilius
"scholasticus" to denote something other than "rhetorician." Glabrio Faustus. And in ca. 443 he composed two
Even if he used the word in accordance with its meaning in
poems partially to celebrate the baptism of Placidia,
later Latin, he might have signified that Merobaudes was an
advocate rather than a master of rhetoric. Cf. Souter, Glossary the younger daughter of Valentinian and Eudoxia.26
(Oxford, 1949), s.v. "scholasticus." Nevertheless, Jeep is sub- It was perhaps his literary works honoring the
stantially correct, for the phrase "otium scholare" in the inscrip- imperial family that caused Merobaudes to reach the
tion occurs in such a context that it connotes the scholarly leisure
peak of his military career. In 443 Valentinian III
of a rhetorician. For the testimony of Boethius, cf. Commentaria
in Topica Ciceronis bks. 4 and 5 [PL 64: pp. 1109 and 1147], with apparently made him magister utriusque militiae.
observations by A. Galland in PL 61: pp. 971-972. By virtue of this office the soldier-orator assumed the
17 This is essentially the perspective of Sirago, Galla Placidia
(Louvain, 1961), p. 355. Admittedly much of the praise of 21 CIL 6: no. 1724. By Merobaudes' time the name or title
Merobaudes' scholarly and rhetorical talents in CIL 6: no. 1724 "Flavius" probably designated all military officers and members
may be an echo of literary topoi. Many poets, especially Catul- of the central bureaucracy. Cf. Mocsy, Akte des IV. interna-
lus, were regarded as docti. Cf. Tib. III 6, 41; Ov. Am. III 9, tionalen Kongresses f ur griechische und lateinische Epigraphik
62; and Mart. I 61, 1. But the inscription honoring Merobaudes (Vienna, 1964), pp. 257-263. Since the inscription cited above
develops the point so much as to suggest that the poet was shows that Merobaudes' early official career centered on the
actually engaged in the study of rhetoric. The testimony of military, it seems likely that his acquired name indicates his
Boethius sharpens the possibility that Merobaudes was indeed a tenure of some military post. The possible title of such a
rhetorician. command will be discussed below.
18 CIL 6: no. 1724. See below, p. 39. 22 CIL 6: no. 1724. For the implications of the rank of vir
19 CIL 6: no. 1724. For the possible identity of the enemy, spectabilis
cf. and the office of Count of the Consistory, see below,
Thompson, Jour. Roman Studies 46 (1956): p. 73, n. 46; and S. p. 40.
Szadeczky-Kardoss, s.v. "Bagaudae," RE Supp. 11 (1968): pp. 23 CIL 6: no. 1724 =H. Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1:
346-354, at p. 349. It has been suggested that Merobaudes no. 2950; and Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 2-3. See below, pp.
also campaigned against the Bacaudae in Armorica, a district in 39-40.
northern Gaul. Cf. Lot, Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire 17 24 But Panegyric I is probably not this composition. See
(1938): p. 910, n. 1; Czuth, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), p. 37; below, pp. 32-41.
and Olajos, Antik Tanulmarnyok 13 (1966): p. 173, n. 13. This 26 Cf. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire (London, 1923)
is possible but there is no evidence indicating such a campaign. 1: p. 251. See also the discussion below, pp. 36-37.
Cf. Szadeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 352. 26 For these surviving works and their dates, see below, pp.
20 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 1. See below, p. 39. 16-32.
regional command in Spain immediately subordinate honor granted to him for life.33 Furthermore, the
to AMtius.27 Perhaps at the same time Theodosius II patriciate or his brief command as Master of Soldiers
acted on a suggestion of Aetius and awarded Mero- probably entitled him to the highest senatorial rank,
baudes a title of high distinction-evidently that of that of vir inlustris.34 The influence of Atius helped
patricius.28 The soldier-rhetorician succeeded his restore him to his former position. Between 443 and
father-in-law Asturius, who had been campaigning in 446 the rhetorician apparently delivered an oration
the province of Hispania Tarraconensis since 441.29 in the Senate at Rome. The oration was in the tradi-
The task of both Asturius and Merobaudes was to tion of the gratiarum actio, a panegyric of thanks-
suppress an uprising of the Bacaudae, a group of ruined giving. Merobaudes praised Atius and gratefully
peasants and other dissidents operating in that credited him with the attainment of his highest title,
province. It is significant that the power of the apparently that of patrician.35 Later, on 1 January,
Spanish aristocracy to which Merobaudes belonged was 446, the orator again celebrated the merits and deeds of
partially the cause of this rebellion. As the aristoc- Aetius, this time when the latter assumed his third
racy increased its landed wealth, more small farmers consulate.36
were ruined, and thus became raw material for a After the delivery of this last panegyric, one hears
peasant uprising. Another reason for the Bacaudic nothing more about Merobaudes' literary or official
disturbances in Spain in the 440's-and even into the career. He died at an uncertain date-apparently
450's-was the general unrest which had seized the before the 460's-37 and was buried in Rome. His
peninsula since the barbarian invasions that began in epitaph has survived in fragments. It apparently
409.30 Merobaudes gained some success in carrying celebrates his literary prowess, and it may indicate that
out his assignment. In a short time he broke the re- his wife, probably the daughter of Asturius, did not
sistance of the Bacaudae based at Araceli, a town in survive him.38
the upper Ebro Valley.3" But his achievement made
Valentinian's distaste for brutal repression of rebellion and ar-
him the object of jealousy back in Italy. Certain ranged for Merobaudes' recall; even Pope Leo I, wary of recent
influential persons, possibly political rivals of the disturbances by Manicheans in Spain-disturbances closely
soldier-orator and his superior Atius, persuaded linked with those of the Bacaudae-may have helped persuade
Valentinian III to issue an imperial rescript recalling Valentinian to ease the pressure on the dissidents. Sirago's
analysis of the politics behind Merobaudes' recall is rather con-
him.32
vincing. Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 173, n. 13,
Despite this show of imperial disfavor, Merobaudes accepts it. For a similar assessment, with some evidence to
managed to maintain himself in the upper echelons of support it, cf. Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp. 278-279.
the Senate. He retained the title of patrician, an But Sirago's suggestion that Valentinian was reticent about sup-
pressing rebellion in Spain seems far-fetched. In 446 Valen-
27 Hydat. 128 [Chron. min 2: p. 24]. For the nature of tinian once again sent to Spain a magister utriusque militiae, a
Merobaudes' command, cf. Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, certain Vitus, to deal with unrest in Baetica and Carthaginiensis.
1964) 1: p. 192, and 3: p. 36, n. 44. For further discussion, see Vitus dealt with the trouble brutally but ineffectively. Cf.
below, p. 37. Hydat. 134 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24].
28 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 3-5. See below, pp. 35-38. 33 For lifelong tenure of the patriciate, cf. Picotti, Archivio
29 Hydat. 125, 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]. Asturius' title and storico italiano ser. 7, 9 (1928): pp. 16-20; and Heil, Der konstant-
the dates of his command are confirmed by his consular diptych inische Patriziat (Basel, 1966), p. 21, et passim.
of 449, on which he is designated as "ex mag. utriusq. mil." Cf. 3 For patricians being awarded the rank of inlustris, cf.
Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1: no. 1300=Delbriick, Die Picotti, Archilvio storico italiano, ser. 7, 9 (1928): pp. 14-15. For
Consulardiptychen (Berlin, 1929), pp. 95-99; and Jones, Later the attainment of the same rank by former Masters of Soldiers,
Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 3: p. 36, n. 44. cf. Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 2: p. 528.
30 Hydat. 125, 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]; cf. Salvian. De gub. 35 Merob. Paneg. I passim. See below, pp. 32-41. Oost, Galla
Dei V 23. For the general nature and causes of the Bacaudic Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 280, n. 107, raises the question
disturbances in Spain, cf. Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): whether Merobaudes also composed a panegyric for the Vicen-
pp. 11-23, esp. p. 16; Balil, Latomus 24 (1965): pp. 891-893; nalia and sixth consulship of Valentinian in 445.
Stroheker, Germanentum (Zurich, 1965), pp. 74-75; Czuth and 36 Merob. Paneg. II passim. See below, pp. 41-59.
Sziadeczky-Kardoss, Bibliotheca classica orientalis 3 (1958): p. 7 Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 173, points out
140; Korsunski, ibid. 6 (1961): pp. 87-88; and Sz'adeczky- that Sidon. Carm. IX 277-280, 296-301 implies that Merobaudes
Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 352. was dead by the time the poem was written. This poem, one of
31 Hydat. 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]. Cf. E. Hubner, s.v. Sidonius' nugae, dates from ca. 461-467. Cf. Loyen, Sidoine
"Araceli," RE 2, 1 (1896): p. 366. Apollinaire: Poemes (Paris, 1960), p. xvii.
32 Hydat. 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]. For the meaning of 38 CIL 6: no. 31983 = Diehl, Inscriptiones christianae veteres
"sacra praeceptio," cf. Souter, Glossary (Oxford, 1949), s.v. (Berlin, 1961) 1: no. 105 a-b. If one accepts the restoration of
"praeceptio." Jealousy of Merobaudes was not limited to the frg. b, Merobaudes' wife died before her husband. Unless
year 443. One can detect a note of envy in Sidonius' praise of Merobaudes' first wife died and the poet remarried, the spouse
him. Cf. Sidon. Carm. IX 296-301; Vollmer, MGH:AA14: p. i; mentioned in this epitaph is the daughter of Asturius. Another
and Teuffel, Geschichte (Berlin, 1913) 3: p. 428. According to inscription, found in Rome but of uncertain origin, may refer to
Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), pp. 342, 384-388, political the soldier-rhetorician Merobaudes. Cf. CIL 15: no. 1702; and
rivals of Merobaudes-and by implication Aetius-played on Diehl, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1961) 1: ad no. 105 b.
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 1971] TRANSLATION 11
TRANSLATION CARMEN III
DIAR (?) * *
CARMEN I
Codex p. 260 The wood, filled with the chill of a hidden cold,
(A few verses of the page and of the poem missing) spreads out the shade of summer with its waving
branches, and it does not allow a climate common to
Harmony of the table portrayed hovers over the doors,
itself and the summer season; the leafy shelter con-
as does the sacred pair of the imperial house, where
tains its own winter. [5] A lovely box-tree with
festive guests carry on eternal banquets and the
clipped foliage-the likeness of Spartan marble-
royal couches are resplendent with purple coverlets.
spreads out its trimmed surface; not even Persian
[5] The Emperor himself in full splendor occupies
arrows can pierce it....
with his wife the center of the ceiling, as if they were
the bright stars of the heavens on high; he is the (Four, or at most six, verses missing from Carmen III)
salvation of the land, and worthy of veneration. p. 256; beginning of p. 273
In the presence of our protector a new exile suddenly
weeps for his lost power. Victory has restored the kindly Venus joined . . . with Mars.
world to the one who has received it from nature,
[10] and an illustrious court has furnished a bride CARMEN IV
from afar. Here, when his sacred mother seeks the
Look! Already the second year is unfolding, and
kisses of her peaceful son, you would suppose that
it brings back the festive day to the boy; on this day
the Castalian god was at hand with his mother. he was brought to birth by the breath of life, and
When his sister stands nearby, you would think that drank the power of the air poured into him. [5]
the shining luminary of the bright moon is glittering Show your favor now, all you Muses of Latium; grow
with her brother's light. [15] If his wife is present, green now, all you forests of Latium. Let the thresh-
you would say it was the covenant of Thetis, Nereus' olds attain vernal bloom, and let ivy creep over
daughter, formed on the Thessalian wedding couch laurel wreaths with a wandering embrace. Let the
of Peleus. From this, their offspring, one may even Tiber rejoice with a peaceful swell, and let it calm
hope for a grandson, with whom only Larisa might
down its waters with winter's fair weather, [10]
compare her hero. Look! A young child, only
neither muddy-red nor rough in any wave. Let the
recently sent into the world, [20] already carries the
fierce leader ease his warlike heart (he is worthy of
mystic rites in her young heart, attesting God's
the staff of retirement); and let him embrace his
presence within her by her cries. You would think
milk-white offspring with muscular arms. [15] Let
she felt his presence, for so had she moved her tender
his wife be at hand with Rome's associate, her father;
mouth with a trembling sound. Oh fortunate one,
a wife not to be celebrated with trivial songs, an
to whom at one time . . . a twofold life....
offspring of heroes, and a descendant of kings. Her
(One, or at most three, verses missing from Carmen I) renown outdoes that of womanhood. She was not
p. 259 like Thetis, [20] who washed away her anguished
fear beneath the hidden waves of the Styx, and,
CARMEN II panting with alarmed anxiety . . . her son . . .
against the destiny of the gods and the fear of
(One distich apparently missing) death.
The court flourishes, after obtaining its master's
(About four verses missing)
beautiful offspring, and the ceiling itself, set on fire
p. 255
by the chariot of Phoebus and the purple of the
Emperor, shines with youthful light and holds united . . . (she) wet the youthful limbs of the newly-born
the stars of heaven and earth. [5] Water flows into boy in the fountain filled with divine power, [25]
marble reservoirs, and with rushing stream splashes where God, the master of the pure baptismal font,
over horned animals fashioned from metals, and is received by the mystic wave of water, drives away
fills the . . . crystals with rapidly flowing currents. sins, and does not allow their previous existence; he
The jewel carries the liquid, once liquid itself. The renews life and removes punishment. You were
Emperor, [10] whose sacred offspring the joyful consecrated by these initial rites, boy, [30] and
world seeks, occupies the high . . . with his wife, Rome received you with throbbing bosom; her dress
his companion. What marvellous faith! The world was loose, laying bare her side, and she gave to you
may wish for men to wield the sceptre, and it is her nourishing teat, which was exposed and visible
unafraid to ask in prayer for an abundant succession from afar in every war. [35] A fortunate delay of
of kings; and the court, unworried about the lineage Lucina put off and then brought about the birth.
of its rule, maintains its own masters without inter- It was better to delay, so that you, who were long
ruption while it creates new ones. denied to timorous hopes and destined to become a
citizen of mistress Rome, might see the royal dwelling who exhibits so great a celerity in planning, a strict-
of Quirinus, your birth-place, and the distinguished ness in judgement, a gentleness in conversation, a
houses of Latium; [40] so that you, an offspring of serenity of expression, a brevity of anger and an endur-
Mars, might see Mars' hearth; in this respect you ing love? Oh most auspicious occasion of my ora-
are already more famous than your illustrious father, tion! All men admit that I speak the truth; [15]
because your father was a boy scarcely in his adult thus far they complain that I have left out certain
years when he was exposed to the Getic hordes-a things regarding your deeds. Certainly ignorance
delay of wars and a pledge of a treaty-[45] and severely handicaps the future speaker: one ought to
removed the torches aimed at Latium, and was the know the man about whom one is talking. The
ransom of a fearful world. things which are to be proclaimed regarding brave
p. 274 men are not only those which popular rumor makes
PANEGYRIC I known. For even when victory . . . [20] whatever
the favorable fortune of war has granted is designated
(A few pages of the codex, and about four lines of
by this name. Yet (a rumor) would not fill the minds
p. 274 missing)
of its hearers as (it would) if (it described) the
frg. IA marches thenmselves and the efforts and the perfect
likeness of struggles and the wounds and destruction
...by your fortune rather than by nature....
and dust bloodied with the enemy gore....
Nothing which you might wish to hide can be de-
tected. In short, you perform everything as if you (about four lines missing)
knew that what you have done is seen and judged p. 270
by all. frg. IIA
[5] Therefore let those who are ashamed of being
I . . the Senate has adopted (me) . . .into the
detected remain hidden for it is not a mark of good association of the toga. On account of this praise
conduct to seek seclusion excessively and yet evil of you Rome together with the Emperor has fashioned
men run from witnesses in vain. Indeed, what good
me in bronze destined to endure; finally, on behalf
is it for those who have a conscience not to have
of this the Emperor closest to the rising sun has
confidants? By all means let those witnesses who recently elevated me to a title of the greatest honor.
wish come to us [10] judges howsoever severe of [5] For the Emperor realized how faithful I was in
our customs and integrity, and not only our own recounting his (Atius') actions when he was present,
Catos, but also the renowned foreign names of the since I did not keep silent about his good deeds when
Lacedaemonians and Athenians. Surely they will he was absent. Consider now, unconquered leader,
find no period of time, no day, and in short no hour how great are the rewards owed to you for doing these
among your deeds which they would not admire. things, on behalf of which such great things have been
[15] For your bed is a barren rock or a thin covering granted to me, their reporter. [10] Indeed, no com-
on the ground; you spend your nights in watchfulness, mon reward nor an honor similar to the rest, nor any
your days in toil; furthermore, you undergo hardship ordinary praise is to be presented to you. Never-
willingly; your breastplate is not so much a defense theless, you have a reward-giver-your own con-
as a garment . . . not a magnificent display but a science; for truly the greatest harvest of deeds cor-
way of life; finally . . . [20] what is readiness for rectly done is to have done them, and there is no
battle to others is routine to you. [15] recompense for virtues worthy of the same
And so, not undeservedly did nature fashion you beyond the virtues themselves. Therefore, as often
as combining eagerness and hard work, hard work and as I or anyone else engaged in this business of speaking
power . . . your proximity . . . your swiftness.... discuss certain things about your deeds, we either
(about four lines missing) cultivate our character or the desires of everyone
p. 273
else. You rely on yourself, you look to yourself,
[20] and you seek no model which you might wish
frg. IB
to imitate beyond yourself. Nevertheless, there is
. . . a tent . . . to level ground . . . he sets up a no region, no place, and finally no tongue which is
tent. Then if there is any respite from war, you without praise of you. Those who go to Thrace . . .
survey either sites of cities, or mountain passes, or a triumph . . .those who by your plans . . . within
the broad expanse of fields, or river crossings, or the Spains. . ..
[5] distances on roads, and there you seek to discover
(about four lines missing)
xvhat place is more suitable for infantry and cavalry,
p. 269
more suited for an attack, safer for a retreat, and
frg. IIB
richer in resources for a bivouac. Thus even the
very interruption of war is advantageous for war. . . .you are an appraiser of yourself . . . how
But aside from [10] distinction in battle, who is there immoderate and extraordinary is the rejoicing every-
where, when some witness speaks favorably about Spanish lands with a cloudy boundary by ascending
your deeds. For in addition to the fact that the the heights of lofty mountains here there was no
world is unanimous in its love for you-this you have longer anything under our rule. But the warlike
experienced-[5] truth herself also delights in your avenger [20] has opened up the captive road; driven
exploits. Certainly no one doubts about rumor out the marauder and regained the obstructed high-
whenever it announces that you have conquered. ways; and returned the people to their abandoned
When I came down to the winding, majestic shore, cities and the adjacent territory to the lands of our
where the rushing sea flows in as far as Salonae allies. Rescued by then from Scythian madness onl
through indentations of the land, I met someone who all sides . . . an enemy....
[10] related that he had participated in your recent
(about two verses missing)
campaigns.
p. 258; end of p. 271
"All the forces of the Goths," he exclaimed, "had
sallied forth with their king to ravage Roman terri- . . .The occupier of Libya [25] had dared to tear
tory. When our leader learned of this- "-no longer down by exceedingly fated arms the seat of Dido's
did I wait for him to say, "He went forth and joined kingdom, and had filled the Carthaginian citadels
in conflict," for I did not doubt that this was done by with northern hordes. Since then he has taken off
you; [151 I asked immediately where, how, and how the garb of an enemy, and has desired ardently to
many you had put to flight. bind fast the Roman faith by more personal agree-
"At the mountain," he then replied, "which the ments, to count the Romans as relatives for himself,
ancients as if by premonition called Snake Mountain and to join his and their offspring in matrimonial
(for here the poisons of the state have now been alliance. [30] Thus, while the leader regains the
destroyed), he surprised-as is his custom-and peaceful rewards of the toga and orders the consular
killed the greatest part of the enemy; [20] once the chair, now at peace, to abandon war trumpets, these
infantry units, which were very numerous, were very wars have given way everywhere in admiration
routed, he himself followed hard on the scattering of his triumphal attire. Now that the polar region
cavalry troops and overwhelmed those standing fast of Scythia has been overcome, it is his pleasure to
with his might, and those fleeing with his eager march through Rome with hallowed consular axes.
rapidity. Not long afterwards the king himself was [35] Father Mars himself, whom Destiny made
on hand with the remainder of his forces, and, stupe- Latium's origin, does not obstruct with savage arms
fied with sudden horror near the trampled bodies." the celebration of the leader, his associate. The
spears and chariot of the god are at rest, and the idle
PANEGYRIC II chariot-horses uncover fodder hidden in Rhiphaean
snows. Bellona disarms her locks; after taking off
(Preface)
her helmet, [40] she wreathes her dusty hair with the
. . . if here my writing is to be vindicated. gray olive branch, and teaches her crested brow to
(End of the preface) grow tame with the leafage. This is the repose that
so many wars have given you, oh Roman. Peace
p. 257; beginning of p. 272 comes, summoned by arms; Victory, borne in front,
has always drawn the kindred consular chair of the
He has returned with the Danube at peace, and has
stripped the Tanais of madness; he orders the lands, leader. [45] After the laurel wreath the togas of
peace have returned, and the fasces, pursuing the
glowing-hot with blackened upper air, to be free of
leader's recompense, retrace the lofty steps of the
their habitual warfare. The Caucasus has granted
repose to the sword, and its savage kings renounce triumphal route. These trappings cannot rival him:
his bravery overcomes his own rewards, and hard
combat. [5] The Rhine has bestowed pacts making
work surpasses its successful outcome. What gifts
the wintry world Rome's servant, and, content to
of Fate can counterbalance the deeds of this man?
be guided by western reins, rejoices that the Tiber's
Perhaps extraordinary titles. ...
domain swells for it from either bank. A native
dweller, now more gentle, traverses the Armorican (about two verses of the page missing)
wilds. [10] The land, accustomed to conceal with p. 268
its forests plunder obtained by savage crime, has lost
(one folio, i.e. about fifty-six verses, plus four verses
its old ways, and learns to entrust grain to its untried
of p. 268 missing)
fields. The hand which long fought against the efforts
of Caesar upholds the laws received under our consul, [50] " . . . and Osiris, wept for by the peoples of
and although it stirs up its furrow with Getic plows, the Nile. I am despised. Thus all respect for my
[151 it shuns the barbarous association of the nearby kingdom has perished owing to one disaster after
race. From here also, where southernmost Gaul another. I am driven from the waves, and I cannot
resounds with Tyrrhenian waves, and grazes the rule on land. Nevertheless, I will not endure this
unavenged; a just fate will attend my complaints. (two folios, i.e. about one hundred ten verses, plus
[55] I will call forth nations situated far away in the about four verses of p. 262 missing)
North, and the Phasian stranger will swim in the
p. 262; beginning of p. 267
fearful Tiber. I will jumble peoples together, I will
break the treaties of kingdoms, and the noble court " . . and a gentle propriety under peace. Let
will be thrown into confusion by my tempests." him not delegate, but wage war, and let him renew
Thus she spoke, and already she had been carried destiny with the triumphs of old; [100] let not booty
aloft by the westerly winds to the sluggish Northern as his teacher and the mad desire for gold compel him
Bear Star, [60] and had entered the freezing clouds to surrender his spirit to unceasing cares; instead,
of the Rhiphaean mountain. Sitting here under a let a praise-worthy love of arms, and the sword,
jutting cliff, cruel Enyo had hidden a madness driven ignorant of Latium's blood but dripping with blood
to flight beneath a long-lasting peace. She was dis- from enemy throats, show him unconquerable yet
tressed because the world was without distress. She gentle. "
groans in sadness at the rejoicing. Her ugly face is The prayers did not leave any uncertainty, [105]
caked with hideous filth, [65] and dried blood is and it was well known whom the world requested.
stiff on her clothing. Her chariot is tilted back, and The harmonious love of commons and senators, and
the harness hangs stiff. Her helmet's crest droops. the unanimous disposition of the nobles has Aetius
Light does not glow red in the circle of her harsh in mind. Men do not hesitate to speak, but they have
bronze shield, and all her spears have lost their sharp sought openly. Already the judgement of the world
points. When the baneful goddess perceives her and the faith of all men desire without instigation
from her airy course, [70] she leaps down, and rouses that which [110] the Fates command. The well-
her, apathetic through she is, with the following known bravery of the man supported their enthusiasm
words: and helped their good will-and so did the renown of
"What sleep, my sister, has buried your miserable his great father. For he was engendered by a famous
limbs beneath an endless peace? Since a harmful sire. (But by chance a cunning sword, concealed
repose has overwhelmed . . . your heart . . . weak by a trumped-up request, struck down his father, who
your war-trumpets. . had achieved slaughter in the North and a righteous
(four or five verses missing) lot, [115] and with his life had purchased glory in
p. 267 death. Just so did the fighting Fabii once fall on
behalf of their ancestral clan, as did Decius, who
. . . dress, cover your face with a helmet. [75] poured out his life by giving it an untimely end, but
Force savage crowds into war, and let the Tanais, possesses renown without end, since the glory of
raging in its unknown regions, bring forth Scythian praise given him rewards his passion for death.)
quivers. Knock down gilded houses and metal- Aware of such great lineage, [120] the hero renews
covered roofs, which we have seen all over the circuit by his outstanding deeds the well-deserved. ...
of Latium. Let men rush glittering into arms. Let
the heavy belt sparkle with gold; [80] let gilded (about four or five verses missing)
quivers surround the arrows; let a strip of gold be p. 261; end of p. 268
fastened to the hooked curb-bit. Let jewels set the
steel on fire, and let the light from the gilded torches . . .scarcely did he raise up his down-bent face with
of the helmet clothe the swords glittering with iron. unfamiliar strides and plant his first steps in snows
Let no walls have the power to ward off your rage. over which he had crawled, when soon his hands
[85] Let peoples and kings tremble at your savage sought a missile, and he played with frozen rain;
growling. Then drive the deities and the friendly after making a simulated javelin out of ice, [125]
powers from the lands. Rob the gods of their own he attempted combat, initiated his first childhood
incense-let no fire on the altars grow pale when fed games to battles, and even then looked to genuine
with a heap of fragrant spices. But I will enter the spears. There was no delay: when the world was
lofty palaces, concealed by guile. [90] I will drive going down before Scythian swords, and northern
away the customs of ancestors and the spirit of old. spears were overwhelming Tarpeian axes, he broke
Let the slothful and the vigorous be praised together the enemy's mad attack, and became the guarantee
with no distinction, and let there be no respect for of a proud [130] treaty and the ransom of the world
the just; let Phoebus be disregarded, and eloquence (from this stems the recent confirmation of the faith
be despised and perish; let honor befall the undeserv- expressed in his prayer, because as an energetic com-
ing, [95] and let not excellence, but chance govern mander he overwhelms by powerful arms those whom
he subdued by peace as a boy); and he restrained war,
the balance of affairs; let harsh desire and insane lust
for savage gold rage in men's hearts. These things, not knowing what warfare was. Already the fierce
however, not without the design of Jupiter, without Getae were astonished at the limbs of one so young.
the highest power.. . . [135] After admiring the fearsome dignity of the boy
and the eyes indicating his destiny, the king himself cealment throughout the dark shadows; death, its
had given him his first quiver to wear, and praised aim uncertain in darkness, scatters bloodshed beneath
him as he poised his arms and carried the spear, a most certain destiny. In the doubtful light wander-
forgetting that he was one of us. Oh the heart of the ing spears follow courses which know fate, and as
king, ignorant of what danger it would be for savage they wander they bring death. Already a great
peoples [140] that he teaches the Roman leader the part of the culprits subdued by war [180] prepares
art of war! But in name he calls him son, and long-delayed agreements, and after gradually retreat-
prefers to speak of a pledge of nature than of peace. ing it tries to . . . the threats, and now with dis-
Under such a judge (Atius) first rejoiced in setting cordant arms, while a part wages war, another makes
his youthful years on fire with warlike pursuits.... gestures asking for pardon, and another seeks flight
hastily, until the conquering flames have devoured
(two pages, i.e., about fifty-six verses missing)
the walls penetrated by protracted effort, [185] and
p. 271 behold! the last battles give desired renown to the
conquered, who fall beneath savage war. But let
. . .when he laid low with Roman arms a Teutonic my verse at last turn its song from bloodshed to
enemy [145] which was then unskilled at war and hallowed treaties. Always do wars resound in song,
untried in full-scale combat. Nevertheless, even always will the enemy be mentioned. Peace, for
with great resources and a strong Rome, this man which we have prefaced so many battles, is assured
continued the struggle in Gaul for twice five years, of praise. [190] Peace is the long-lived prosperity of
and returned after the war, no longer a young man. the world; with this protector the elements practice
Now the renown is greater, because already the em- an abiding faith; with this, Vulcan restrains the
battled right hand of our heroic leader has overcome waters, beneficent daylight puts away the alternate
enemies changed from the offspring of a barbarian succession of night, and Titania does not burn the
land-[150] enemies equal in fighting, all at one time, earth dried up by Phoebus. Peace, which has given
shut up in their camps; and hereupon has taken back legal government to the people, which has established
the fortresses which once belonged to the conqueror. cities . . . [195] Latium . . . after the wars . . .
For the barricades protected them, as did the turreted of Quirinus . . . soul . . . with bravery . . . Quir-
summit and the ramparts piled on high ground, inus ... (?) twin faces (?) . . . now....
[155] while the hand heaped the finishing touches on
nature. Not one standard-bearer was there-there (end missing)
was a horde-but since the camps were joined for a
ON THE CHRIST
long time, barbarian roughness mixed East with West.
The troop stands, fortified with shields, brandishing Oh true offspring of God, older than all time, now
spears, menacing with the sword and causing harm born but always existing, discoverer of life before
with the arrow flying through the air-a mob [160] your birth, and parent of your mother; you whom
not exalted in spirit, but not unexalted in deeds. your Creator of the same age sent from the stars, and
Mars is proven impartial by unequal circumstance. whom, when poured into the seed of His word, He
On the one side there is the height, impassable and ordered [5] to dwell in a virgin's womb, to enter upon
bristling with defenders and ramparts; on the other the ways of a confining body, and to linger in a small
side there is the bravery of our leader, destined to abode, you whom no abode contains; you who saw
overcome war by skill. And so, growling savagely on your first day what you created when the world
with united strength, the soldiery [165] prepares to was beginning, you yourself being your own artisan,
fight with nature. The untamed wood falls, cut down you yourself being your own creation, you who saw
by the column. Uncovered springs marvel at the fit [10] to experience the adverse fortunes of life,
stars, and mountain lairs perceive the unknown to endure the unfamiliar limits of this body and to
heaven. Fir is joined to fir to make siege towers, submit to human form, so that you might make God
and when it is ordered to overtop the walls, it frightens manifest, and so that slippery uncertainty and long-
the opposing battlements with its summit. [170] deceived cleverness of a changeable world might not
The terrible paths have grown higher, which by the allow human hearts [15] to be ignorant of their creator
strength of hand. ... for so many generations; your mother, aware of your
(about two verses missing) birth, felt your presence, as did the flocks, thunder-
struck with fear; and the wise men, surveying the
p. 272
new star with careful gaze, saw you first in the heavens,
. . . he pushes toward the sky with long ramps, and and, after following the light, found you. You set
orders his associates to stand fast in their lofty free guilty hearts, [20] bring back escaped souls into
camp. By now there is no day without war; every dead bodies, and order life to return. By virtue of
night is spent in arms. At that time the warlike the gift you have received, you who are without
arrow, [175] destined to bring slaughter, finds con- death make your way to the spirits of the dead, and
16 CLOVER: FLAVIUS MEROBAUDES [TRANS. ANIER. PHIL. SOC.
approach the recesses of death. For you alone to be dining room.4 In the room there was also a decorated
born was not the beginning, and to die was not the table,5 which was the scene of banqueting.6 At line
end, but once night is repelled [25] you return to the 5 Merobaudes notes the presence of the emperor and
heavens and your Father, and in year-long succession his wife in the center of the room. Later he points
you once more take away disease from the purified out other members of the imperial family who were
lands. You alone, your Father's companion, and a on hand.7
guiltless spirit so many times are you one, and single But if one maintains that Mlerobaudes describes an
in a three-fold name. Who could believe [30] that assembly of the emperor's family, at least two diffi-
you could have died for any other reason than for the culties arise. It will be shown below that Merobaudes
sake of all-you who could give back life? wrote this poem at the court of the Western Emperor
Valentinian III (425-455). Valentinian's mother,
the Dowager Empress Galla Placidia, was a devout
CO\INIIENTARY
Christian, and her son probably shared her faith.8
CARMEN I It is unlikely that a most Christian emperor would
There is general agreement among critics that this allow statues of pagan deities to stand in a room of
poem, like its companion piece, Carmen II, is an his palace. On the other hand, he might permit a
ekphrasis-a description. In both pieces Merobaudes decorative representation of Harmony and the palace's
describes an imperial family probably the western guardian spirits. In the Great Palace of the Emperors
branch of the House of Theodosius, whose regular at Constantinople, for instance, a pavement mosaic
residence was at Ravenna. But the critics, who give dating from about the sixth century depicted mythical
most of their attention to Carmen I, disagree as to the monsters.9 Constantine Manasses, a Byzantine his-
setting in which the family appears. According to torian and orator of the twelfth century, describes a
one school of thought, Carmen I portrays an actual mosaic in a room of the imperial palace in which
family gathering in a dining room of the imperial Ge (Earth) appeared as a woman.'0
palace at Ravenna.' Another interpretation is that A second problem for the interpretation currently
Merobaudes notes a representation of the imperial under discussion arises from the identity of the im-
family in a room of the palace. In other words, the perial figures in Merobaudes' poem. It will be shown
subject of the poet's ekphrasis is not the family itself, below that the "princeps" of line 5 and the "peaceful
but a work of art.2 son" of verse 11 are the same man. His wife (5) is
Both hypotheses can be defended, but the latter identical with the "coniux" of line 15. If one assumes
ultimately seems more likely. If one adopts the that Merobaudes describes an actual family gathering,
former explanation, verses 1-4 perhaps indicate that difficulty in accounting for the appearance of
one has
statues of Harmony and the "sacred pair of the im- the emperor's spouse in verse 5 and her apparent
perial hearth"-apparently the guardian spirits of the disappearance in line 15. Verses 15-16 constitute a
emperor's household-3 stood near the doors of a condition in which Merobaudes implies that the wife
was not present." On the other hand, the absence
of the empress in line 15 is understandable if one
1 Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. 1;
Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3; and E. Brandt, s.v. "foris" (3),
interprets Nlerobaudes' verses as a description of an
Thesaurus linguae latinae 6, 1 (1912-1926): p. 1062. artistic composition. Merobaudes is simply reflecting
2 Cf. Heimsoeth, Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie, ser. 2, 2on the basis of a picture.'2
(1843): p. 532; Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): pp. 7-8; In effect, 1\Ierobaudes' piece is quite comprehensible
Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 43-47; Sirago, Galla
if one views it as an ekphrasis of a work of art. The
Placidia (Louvain, 1961), pp. 315, 356; Oost, Classical Philology
60 (1965): pp. 4-7; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmdnyok 13 (1966):
pp. 175-176. Testi-Rasponi deviates from this interpretation spondence here is the word "concordia." The tone and imagery
on one major point: He maintains that Merobaudes describes art of the two poems are entirely different.
work in the church of Santa Croce in Ravenna. This is unlikely. 4Cf. Brandt, Thesaurus linguae latinae 6, 1: p. 1062.
The imagery of Carmen I is predominantly pagan. Even the 5 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 1.
poet's portrayal of a baptism at the end of the ode (vss. 19-23) 6Merob. Carm. I 3.
does not contain distinctively Christian imagery. Merobaudes 7Merob. Carm. I 11-23.
probably would not think pagan thoughts while gazing at an 8 For Placidia's faith, cf. Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968),
artistic composition in a church. pp. 264-292, et passim. For that of Valentinian, cf. W. Ensslin,
I For the identity of "Concordia" and "sacer . . . sexus," cf. s.v. "Valentinianus" (4), RE 7A, 2 (1948): pp. 2232-2259, at pp.
Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 1. On the basis 2239, 2244.
of his unlikely interpretation that Merobaudes describes art work 9 Cf. A. Grabar, L'age d'or (Paris, 1966), pp. 102-105; and
in a church, Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 44-45, Rice, XapLtar7pLo eLs Avoaar6a.oLo K. 'OpX6jvoi' (Athens, 1965) 1:
conjectures that "Concordia" is the Christ, and that the "sacer pp. 1-5.
. . . sexus" is a group of martyrs around him. The point of 10 Cf. Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza (Leipzig, 1912), pp. 93-94.
departure for this suggestion is the correspondence between 11 For the syntax of Merob. Carm. I 15-16 and its implications,
Merob. Carm. I 1 and the first line of four elegaic couplets above
cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8, n. 3; and Oost,
the door of the church of Santa Croce: "Christe, Patris verbum, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5.
cuncti concordia mundi" (cf. Agnellus 41). But the only corre- 12 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5.
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 1971] COMMENTARY 17
imagery in part of this poem show that one of its chief as separate entities. One may conclude, then, that
inspirations was Catullus 64.13 Of course Catullus a depiction of a banquet table suggested to the poet
writes of the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, but inter- some guardian spirits as imaginary protectors of the
rupts his account of the marriage to describe and persons seated there. The poet gives only one indica-
reflect on a scene embroidered on the wedding couch. tion of the identity of the actual participants in the
There is evidence from Merobaudes' poem that dinner. He refers to the banqueting as "eternal"
Catullus 64 was an impetus not only for the imagery an adjective regularly applied to the emperor. Pos-
but also for the choice of subject. Verses 1-4 furnish sibly the picture above the door(s) showed the em-
some indications that the poet is portraying an artis- peror and his family partaking of a meal.16
tic composition. The phrase "incumbit foribus" The remainder of Merobaudes' poem (verses 5-23)
(1) literally means "hovers over the doors." Evidently can also be understood as an ekphrasis of an artistic
some figures (whose identity will be discussed below) composition. In lines 5-6 a representation of the
took their position above a door or doors. The poet's emperor and his wife seemingly occupies the center
odd statement is understandable if one assumes that of the palace room's ceiling.'7 Such a scene would be
a picture appeared over the door (s) of a room in the typical of the structure of art work in the Later
imperial palace.14 Merobaudes may point out one Roman Empire. The emperor regularly was the
detail of this representation directly: a table is "picta" central figure of an imperial portrait."8 Mlerobaudes
(1). Of course this adjective can mean "decorated," reinforces the literally high, central position of the
but it can also mean "portrayed." imperial couple by comparing them to the "bright
But if Merobaudes is describing a picture above the stars of the heavens above.""9 Other members of the
door(s) of a palace room, it is difficult to determine imperial family perhaps appeared near them, and in
what figures and objects made up this scene. At verses 11-23 the poet notes and reflects on their
first glance it appears that Harmony and the guardian presence.20
spirits of the imperial house were shown as "festive But the interpretation of Merobaudes' Carmen I
guests" seated on purple-cushioned couches at a as a description of a picture is not free of difficulties.
banquet table, partaking of a feast.'5 But while it is There are certain features of artistic ekphrasis which
possible that these deities formed part of a decorative are absent in Merobaudes' poem, and Merobaudes'
background of a picture (see above), it is unlikely that work exhibits characteristics not generally found in
the devout Christian Emperor Valentinian III would other literary representations of art. For example,
permit them to occupy the central position they have Catullus 64, which influenced MVerobaudes' verses,
in Merobaudes' poem. In addition, to run these contains reflections on the basis of an embroidered
divinities together with the "festive guests" of the tapestry, but Catullus envisages scenes of action. If
banquet table is to violate the sense of Merobaudes' M\lerobaudes is describing a picture, the scenes and
statement. Nowhere does the poet assert that the the speculation on them are static.2' In addition,
deities are actually seated at the table. He merely
says that they appear in the context of a table "where 16 See again Merob. Carm. I 1-4. For the adjective aeternus
festive guests carry on eternal banquets." It seems (see vs. 3) as an epithet applied to the emperor, cf. Thesaurus
more natural to regard the divinities and the guests linguae latinae 1 (1900): pp. 1146-1147, s.v. "aeternus."
Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 315, s.v. "aeternus," interprets this
adjective in a similar fashion. Because of the predominantly
13 Cf. Merob. Carm. I 15-18; and Lenz, RE 15, 1 (1931): p.secular 1041. imagery of this poem, one can reject the interpretation of
14 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8. On the basisTesti-Rasponi
of (Felix Ravenna 31 [1926]: p. 45) that Merobaudes'
Agnellus 41 ("in fronte ipsius tenpli" etc.), Testi-Rasponi, Felix "eternal banquet" is the Eucharist. Testi-Rasponi (ibid.) con-
Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 44-45, concludes that Merobaudes takes strues Merob. Carm. I 1-4 as follows: "La Concordia (Cristo) sta
note of art work above the entrance to a church. For reasons figurata in alto sopra la porta (l'in fronte templi di Agnello) di
discussed above (n. 2), one may reject the notion that Merobaudes questa mensa dove al convito si appresta l'eterno cibo, e dove i
describes art in a church. But Testi-Rasponi may be right in regi troni sono adornati di purpurei cuscini; sulla porta insieme
noting that Agnellus' passage offers a parallel to Merobaudes' alla Concordia e dipinto l'uno e l'altro sesso del lare porporato
description, and in conjecturing that the figures in Merobaudes' (i martiri che fanno corona a Cristo)." I am grateful to Pro-
poem appeared at the entrance of a door. fessors J. P. Heironimus and S. I. Oost for assistance with this
1' Merob. Carm. I 1-4. Vss. 3-4 show that the "mensa" ofpassage.
vs. 1 is a banquet table. I take the phrase "pictae . . . mensae" 17 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; and Olajos,
(vs. 1) to be a genitive of definition which specifies the context in
Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 176.
which Harmony and the "sacred pair" appear or suggest them- 18 Cf. L'Orange, Art Forms (Princeton, 1965), pp. 85-104.
selves to the poet. Cf. Lane, A Latin Grammar (2nd ed., New 19 This interpretation of Merob. Carm. I 6 is not compelling.
York, 1903), pp. 214-215. Given the likelihood that "foribus" Even if the emperor and his wife were standing on the floor, the
of vs. 1 means "doors," it is surely nonsense to take "mensae" poet could still liken them to the stars on high. But in a parallel
with "foribus," and have Harmony hovering over the "doors of passage in Carm. II 9 (cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 4) Mero-
the table." Cf. Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 45. baudes notes that the emperor with his wife occupies something
In vs. 3 "convivia" could mean "banquets," in which case on high (there is a lacuna in the text). The adjective "celsa"
Merobaudes uses pleonasm (cf. "dapes") to convey the sense of again suggests a physically high position.
the festive occasion. But it is also possible that the poet employs 20 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5.
"convivia" in a metonymic sense to signify the "guests." 21 Compare Cat. LXIV 50-266 and Merob. Carm. I passim.
while portraying some members of the imperial 17 Merobaudes possibly returns to figures which
family, Merobaudes uses a series of parallel construc- actually made up the portrait (see below).
tions which are conditional in actuality or in effect The third objection to the interpretation currently
(verses 11-16). This technique of depiction does under discussion-the lack of direct indication that
not usually occur in other ekphraseis of works of Merobaudes is describing a work of art-is seemingly
art.22 Finally, Catullus and other men of letters who decisive. Merobaudes does not use such phrases as
produced descriptions of art often indicate directly "on this painting" or "at the center of the picture"
what they are portraying. The surviving portion of to call attention to the subject of his poem. But
Merobaudes' Carmen I contains no such indication.23 Carmen I does not survive in its entirety, and its
Thus it appears that, if Merobaudes followed Catullus lost portions may have contained similar expressions.
64 to the point of representing an artistic composi- Still, it is pointless to appeal to the poem's missing
tion, he devised new techniques for his task. And fragments to support the current exegesis of it. It
such a course of action would be unusual for a poet is much more germane to the problem at hand to note
who relied heavily on the work of his predecessors.24 that the surviving parts of Carmen I show certain
The problems raised here, however, do not eliminate affinities with some techniques of artistic ekphrasis
the possibility that Merobaudes describes a picture used by poets known to Merobaudes. Merobaudes'
above the door (s) and on the ceiling of a palace room methods of description resemble in particular those
at Ravenna. In the first place, the art of the Later which Vergil occasionally employs when he is repre-
Roman Empire was highly formal and rigid, in con- senting art work. For example, both Vergil and
trast to that of Catullus' day. If Merobaudes con- Merobaudes use deictic adverbs to point to objects
veys an impression of motionlessness while describing or persons they are describing.27 The two poets
members of the imperial family, a possible reason for employ deictic pronouns and verbs which do not
this is that he takes note of a stationary portrait signify motion to call attention to other figures they
typical of his own time.25 Secondly, Merobaudes see.28 Furthermore, neither poet conveys clearly the
uses conditions to describe only four of the persons If the empress appears in the composition (verse 5), one wonders
who appear in his poem. Verses 1-6 contain direct why the poet later implies she is absent (line 15). But this
statements about figures who could well have been difficulty is not decisive. The adverb "hic" (11) need not signal
Merobaudes' return to the same scene of the portrait. It should
part of one or more scenes of a portrait (see above).
be noted that Merobaudes' use of conditions is not entirely
At line 11 Merobaudes uses the deictic adverb "hic"
foreign to the techniques of ekphrasis. In describing a heifer
partially to signal the end of his reflections about the apparently fashioned by Myron, for instance, Geminus, an
emperor and his wife (5-10). This adverb may also epigrammatist of the first century B.C., speculates on the effects of
mean that the poet is resuming his description of the certain alterations of the statue: If you turn the heifer loose, it
will run away to the herd; if you yoke someone to it, perhaps it
picture (see below). But the use of conditions in
will plow. Cf. Anthologia palatina IX 740. But the correspond-
lines 11-16 may be Merobaudes' way of wishing that ence between Geminus' conditions and those of Merobaudes is not
the figures mentioned were present in the portrait. total. Merobaudes merely speculates ("credas," "putes,"
In other words, the members of the imperial family "dicas") on the possible effects if certain things happen, while
noted in verses 11-16 may not have appeared in the Geminus makes direct statements in the future tense. Specula-
tion somewhat similar to that of Merobaudes occurs in an
composition which Merobaudes presumably describes.
epigram of the sixth-century poet Macedonius, who speaks as
Instead, the contents of the actual picture may have follows regarding a statue of a Satyr: As the Satyr nods his head
called these persons to the poet's mind.2" At verse you would say that everything about him is drunk. Cf. Antho-
logia palatina VI 56. For these parallels in general, see Fletcher
For Catullus' description, cf. Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza and Carne-Ross, Arion 4 (1965): pp. 563-581, at p. 566. For
(Leipzig, 1912), pp. 16-17. further discussion of the possible contents of the picture Mero-
22 For the syntax of Merob. Carm. I 11-16, cf. Oost, Classical baudes describes, see below, pp. 20, 22, 23, 24.
Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5. For similar uses of conditions, 27 Compare Merob. Carm. I 11 and Verg. Aen. I 441-493, esp.
see below, n. 26. 467-469, 479; VI 9-33, esp. 23-24, 27; VIII 625-731, esp. 642,
2" Compare Cat. LXIV 50, 251, 265 and Merob. Carm. I 655, 678, 685. Cf. Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza (Leipzig,
passim. Cf. Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza (Leipzig, 1912), 1912), pp. 18-21. In the passages of the Aeneid cited here,
pp. 1-103 (especially pp. 16-17). Vergil indicates directly that he is depicting art work, but to
24 I wish to thank Professor F. Solmsen for calling my attention vary his presentation he often resorts to a simple "hic," "hinc,"
to these difficulties. etc. As noted above, Merobaudes introduces a series of condi-
26 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 5. tions with "hic," thereby indicating that the figures he notes
26 Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8, sees in the deictic (Carm. I 11-16) were not included in the composition which
adverb "hic" an indication that Merobaudes notes a scene of the he supposedly describes. But this aspect of Merobaudes' poem
mosaic. See also Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 45. does not weaken the assertion that the poet uses "hic" to call
Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 5, holds that verses 11-14 attention to a picture. He may turn to a mosaic scene in verse
convey "thoughts in the poet's mind suggested by the picture(s), 11 only to wish that certain members of the imperial family might
not a description of what was actually depicted." Most recent be included in it.
critics maintain that verses 15-16 indicate that the "coniux" 28 Deictic pronouns: Compare Merob. Carm. I 17 ("hac . . .
was not pictured (see above, n. 11). The probable fact that the prole") and Verg. Aen. VIII 649-650 ("illum . . . aspiceres").
"coniux" of verses 5 and 15 is the same person (see below, pp. Of course Vergil is more direct than Merobaudes (cf. "aspiceres")
19-20) raises one difficulty for the interpretation presented here. in taking note of the subject of his description. Bury, Jour.
VOL. 61, PT. l, 1971] COM1MENTARY 19
exact arrangement of the individuals and things he baudes provides a major clue for the solution of this
is representing. Like Catullus, Vergil flickers be- problem in verse 11. In using the adjective "placidus"
tween art and reality in his description of artistic to describe an offspring, he is surely playing on the
compositions.29 Whether Merobaudes portrays an name of the Emperor Valentinian III, Flavius Placidus
actual or a depicted gathering, he does not impart a Valentinianus.4 The "sacra parens" (11) is thus the
distinct impression of its components and their rela- Dowager Empress Galla Placidia. Now this same
tion in space to one another.0 Finally, Merobaudes' line 11 and the three distichs introduced by it furnish
technique of description shows at least one similarity another indication-albeit indirect-of the identity
to that of Statius. In his poem on an equestrian of other main characters in this poem. Verses 11-16
statue of the Emperor Domitian, for instance, Statius contain three clauses parallel in construction and sense.
occasionally interrupts his depiction of the statue Since Merobaudes wrote the first distich from the
itself to remark on Domitian's deeds. Merobaudes point of view of Valentinian, it is likely that the other
frequently pauses in his description to reflect on the two couplets also adhere to the Emperor's outlook.
current actions of the imperial figures who appear in Thus the "soror" of verse 13 is Valentinian's sister
his poem.3' Now it is true that Carmen I does not Justa Grata Honoria, and the "coniux" (15) is his
contain any concrete reminiscences of Vergil or wife Eudoxia.35 Indeed, one may note that the
Statius. One can detect primarily the influence of personalities in lines 17 and 19 also make their
Catullus 64 in this poem, and Merobaudes apparently appearance from Valentinian's point of view. The
did not make extensive use of Catullus' techniques of "proles" and "nova . . . suboles" are probably
description. Still, it is conceivable that Merobaudes Eudocia and Placidia, the elder and younger daughters
recollected the methods of artistic ekphrasis of Vergil of Valentinian and Eudoxia.A6 Testi-Rasponi argues
and Statius-whose works were known to him-32 that the grandchild of line 17 is the future progeny
and applied them to a poem inspired particularly by of the "offspring" Valentinian, and that the child of
Catullus 64. The basic point to be made here, how- line 19 is unborn.7 This is unlikely. The particle
ever, is that Merobaudes' descriptive techniques "en" (19) suggests that the latter infant was actually
correspond to certain methods previous men of letters depicted on the mosaic decoration, and thus was
used to represent artistic creations. already born. Given the fact that there are two
Thus it is at least possible that Merobaudes' offspring described here, and that Valentinian and
Carmen I is an ekphrasis of a work of art. The objec- Eudoxia had two daughters, it seems more natural to
tions raised here to this hypothesis are not decisive. interpret Merobaudes as referring to the latter rather
It seems likely that Merobaudes describes a mosaic than to credit him with visionary power.
in a room of the imperial palace at Ravenna-perhaps Additional members of the imperial family appear-
the palace ad Laureta, which was constructed by ing in the poem are the "princeps" and his wife in
Valentinian III himself.33 verse 5. In order to make a valid identification of
Critics devote most of their attention to verses these two figures one must reach at least a preliminary
5-23 of Carmen I, largely because individual members understanding of the three distichs comprising lines
of the imperial family gain the poet's attention begin- 5-10. On the assumption that Valentinian in line 11
ning at line 5. As noted above, there is general is a child, and that Valentinian and Eudoxia were
agreement that most of the characters mentioned merely betrothed at the writing of this poem, Testi-
belong to the western branch of the House of Theo- Rasponi conjectures that the "princeps" and "coniux"
dosius. But there is considerable debate regarding
the precise identity of some of the figures. Mero- 34 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 11; and
Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 7, n. 3. For Valentinian's
name, cf. W. Ensslin, s.v. "Valentinianus" (4), RE 7A, 2 (1948):
Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8, sees Merobaudes' adjectival pronoun p. 2232. Sidon. Carm. VII 359 makes a similar play on words.
"hac" as a sign that the "proles" was actually depicted. See also Cf. Hansen, De vita Aetii (Dorpat, 1840), part 2: p. 55, n. 225.
Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 5. The deictic particle 36 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5. Vollmer,
"en" in verse 19 perhaps serves also to call attention to a por-
MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 11 and 13, identifies the
trayed figure. Verbs not signifying motion: Compare Merob. "parens" and "soror" as Galla Placidia and Honoria. Bury,
Carm. I 6, 13, 15 and Verg. Aen. VI 22; VIII 653, 657, 680. Cf.Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8, does the same, but ignores
Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza (Leipzig, 1912), pp. 18-21. the parallelism of vss. 11-16 and maintains that the "coniux"
29 Cf. Friedlander, ibid., pp. 16-21. of vs. 15 is the future husband of Honoria. Olajos, Antik
30 Compare the different (and often hesitant) conjectures as to
Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 176, accepts Bury's interpretation.
the composition of the picture(s) Merobaudes presumably de- Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45-46, makes the
scribes. Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; Testi- same identification of all relevant figures as Oost, but for reasons
Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45 and 47; and Oost, discussed below he misinterprets the sense of the condition in
Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 9 n. 24. vss. 15-16.
31 Stat. Silv. I 1, 6-7, 25-28, 50-51, 79-83; and Merob. Carm. 86 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 17 and 19;
I 9-10, 17-23. Bury, Journ. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; and Oost Classical
32 Cf. Vollmer, MGH.AA 14: pp. 4-6, 12-17. Philology 60 (1965): p. 5. The adjective "nova" (19) probably
" Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): pp. 7-8; and Oost, indicates the younger of the two daughters, Placidia.
Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 7. 37 Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45-46.
are the Eastern Emperor Theodosius II and his wife Now the exact identity of these two figures is the
Eudocia.A8 This is extremely implausible. In the subject of considerable debate. Some of the explana-
first place, the Valentinian of verse 11 need not have tions center around the accession of Valentinian III.
been a child. He could be depicted as a grown man In 422 the Western Emperor Honorius and his half-
and still be the son of Galla Placidia. Secondly, sister Galla Placidia quarreled, and early in 423
this identification violates the general sense of verses Placidia fled in exile to the court of Theodosius II.
5-10. Testi-Rasponi himself admits that these lines Honorius died later in that year, and a court official
are all germane to the identity of the "princeps" of named John usurped the throne. His reign was very
line 5. By his own interpretation the "praeses" of brief. In 424 Theodosius ordered an expedition to
verse 7 is Valentinian, Valentinian is the recipient of proceed to Italy and put Valentinian on the throne.
victory (9), and the court of Constantinople prepares By 425 the Eastern army carried out its assignment.
a marriage for the same emperor (10).39 Thus it It secured the capture and execution of John, and
appears that \Ierobaudes wrote these three couplets proclaimed Valentinian full Emperor of the West.
from the point of view of Valentinian, not of Theo- Later in the same year a surrogate of Theodosius II
dosius II. In this context the "princeps" of verse 5 officially conferred the imperial title on Valentinian.4
is Valentinian. The "coniux" (5) is identical with Vollmer takes the exile of verse 8 to be the usurper
that of line 15, Eudoxia.40 One final observation John, and the protector (7) to be Valentinian.45 But
should remove any lingering doubt aroused by Testi- if one interprets this poem as a description of an actual
Rasponi. In verse 10 Merobaudes describes the gathering, this identification becomes plainly im-
wedding of Valentinian and Eudoxia in the perfect possible. It will be shown below that Merobaudes
tense. The marriage had taken place by the time wrote this poem ca. 443. From that point in time
the poet wrote these verses.4" Merobaudes could not notice the presence of a man
Once the setting and the identity of the poem's who had been dead over fifteen years.46 But given
major figures have been established, it is possible to the likelihood that Merobaudes describes a palace
understand more fully the entire work. At verses mosaic, Vollmer's identification remains at least
1-4 Merobaudes perhaps notes a scene representing possible. The mosaic may have depicted John in
the family of the Emperor Valentinian at a banquet. abject surrender before Valentinian. But again the
In lines 5-7 the poet seemingly notices at the center date of composition of this poem militates against this
of the ceiling another scene showing Valentinian, the interpretation. T\ierobaudes, writing in the early
"salvation of the land," and his wife Eudoxia. Then 440's, refers to the "exile" as "novus"-by implication
he remarks on "praeses noster" and a "novus exul" "young" or "recent." At the time of his usurpation
(7-8). Before one can identify these two figures, John was not "young," but a grown man. Further-
it is necessary to understand just what the poet is more, his exile could hardly be described as "recent"
saying. The meaning of the preposition "pro" is if it occurred over fifteen years before 1lerobaudes took
the key to the sentence. When used with reference note of it.47 Bury rejects Vollmer's explanation, and
to persons, pro takes on such denotations as "on maintains that the mosaic represented the child
behalf of" or "instead of."42 But given the distinct Valentinian, exiled by Honorius, weeping in the pre-
possibility that Merobaudes is describing a mosaic, sence of his "protector" Theodosius for the loss of his
and that the "protector" (7) is thus an inanimate ob- realm to John.48 Of course Theodosius did help
ject, there is another more likely interpretation. Valentinian win the throne from John. Bury's
When pro is used with regard to inanimate objects, exegesis fits the circumstances of Valentinian's exile
it regularly signifies "in front of" or "in the presence and accession to the throne of the West, but it raises a
of." Hence in lines 7-8 a "new exile" weeps for his major difficulty. In verses 5-10 1Ierobaudes seem-
lost power in the presence of a "protector."43 ingly describes a mosaic scene which glorifies Valen-
tinian. It is unlikely that such a work of art would
depict the Emperor of the West in a vulnerable
38 Ibid., pp. 43-47.
position.49
39 Ibid., pp. 46-47. The meaning of vss. 7-10 will receive
fuller discussion below. 44 For the events surrounding the exile and accession of Valen-
40 This is the standard interpretation of vs. 5. Cf. Vollmer tinian, cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 274-275, 282-285;
MGH:AA 14: p. 3 ad loc.; Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp. 169-193.
p. 8; and Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 4. 4 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 8. Testi-
41 Merob. Carm. I 10: "praebuit." Testi-Rasponi, Felix Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 47, accepts Vollmer's
Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 47, renders this verb in the present: interpretation.
"appresta. " 46 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8.
42 For the latter interpretation, cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, 47 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 5. For the career
ad Merob. Carm. I 8; and Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): of John, cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. "Joannes" (8), RE 9, 2 (1916): pp. 1745-
p. 47: "Invece che al nostro principe." 1746.
43 This is the grammatical interpretation of Bury, Jour. Roman 48 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; and Olajos,
Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; Oost Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 6; Antik Tanulnadnyok 13 (1966): p. 176.
and Olajos, Antik Tanuzlmanyok 13 (1966): p. 176. 49 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 5-6.
VOL. 61, PT. 1,1971] COMMENTARY 21
Oost makes a more convincing identification of the facing Valentinian, the center of the composition, from
"praeses" and "exul." When Merobaudes wrote this the side.5"
poem around 443, there was a "young" or "recent In line 9 Merobaudes apparently continues to
exile" at the imperial court in Ravenna: Huniric, the meditate on the scene depicting Valentinian, Eudoxia,
son of the Vandal King Geiseric. In 442 Valentinian and Huniric. He observes that victory has restored
concluded a disadvantageous treaty with Geiseric, the world to the one who has received it by birthright.
surrendering to him the rich portions of North Africa There is general agreement that the recipient of victory
around Carthage in exchange for the poorer parts of is Valentinian, who received the Roman world by
that area. In conjunction with the treaty Geiseric virtue of his birth.52 But some controversy exists
handed his son over to the emperor as a hostage. regarding the "victory" to which Merobaudes alludes.
Thus the mosaic which Merobaudes describes probably If one interprets verses 7-8 as referring in some way to
depicted the "exile" Huniric in the presence of the the usurpation of John and the accession of Valen-
"protector" Valentinian. But it is unlikely that the tinian, then line 9 naturally alludes to Valentinian's
composition actually portrayed Huniric weeping victory over the usurper.53 But given the likelihood
before the emperor. Art works of late antiquity were that verses 7-8 remark on the presence of Huniric as a
too formal to permit such activity. In addition, such hostage at the court of Valentinian, it seems more
a picture would surely displease the powerful Geiseric. natural to take line 9 as a reflection on the treaty of
In asserting that the exile weeps, AIerobaudes is 442. In a manner befitting a court poet and indeed
probably indulging in his own reflections on the basis Roman pride in general, Merobaudes turns this humi-
of the mosaic.50 The mosaic perhaps showed Huniric liating treaty into a "victory" for Valentinian. A
peace which merely awarded the emperor the poorer
60 Ibid. The treaty of 442 will receive fuller discussion parts
below, of North Africa has in the poet's vision restored
pp. 51-54. The adverb "subito" in Merob. Carm. I 8 admits at least the entire Western world, Valentinian's
of two possible interpretations. Oost (see above) takes "subito"
birthright.54
with "flet"; thus the exile, in the poet's imagination, "suddenly
weeps" for his lost power. Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 But the treaty of 442 is only one event which Mero-
(1926): p. 47, takes "subito" with "amissas," thereby interpreting baudes calls to mind while presumably gazing at the
the exile's power as "suddenly lost." It is noteworthy that mosaic cluster of the imperial couple and their hostage.
Vergil (Aen. VIII 637) sees war break out "suddenly" on the In a rather abrupt transition the poet speaks of a
shield of Aeneas. On the basis of this corresponding passage,
I incline toward Oost's interpretation. Regarding Oost's ob-
wedding from afar (10), that of Valentinian and
servations on a representation of Huniric in Valentinian's Eudoxia in Constantinople.55 While Valentinian was
presence, it is interesting to note that the theme of the prostrate in exile in the East in 423-424, Theodosius II arranged
enemy was common in art during Valentinian's reign. When the betrothal of this boy of five years to his daughter,
the Hunnish King Attila captured Milan in 452, for example, he
who was born in 422. In early morning of 15 July
saw a painting of the imperial family sitting on golden thrones
with the "Scythians" (apparently the Huns, to judge from 437 Valentinian left Ravenna for the East to marry
Attila's reaction) at their feet. See the Suda, s.vv. "KOpVKOS,"
"Me65LXavov." But this parallel need not suggest that the mosaic the coronation solidus of Valentinian, it perhaps symbolizes
noticed by Merobaudes depicted Huniric in a similarly abject the usurper John, who was decapitated immediately prior to
position. Another representation of a vanquished enemy occurs Valentinian's accession.
on a solidus issued by Valentinian, probably immediately after his 51 For the general position of subordinate figures iIn portraits
inauguration in 425. The obverse depicts Valentinian, while the of this period, cf. L'Orange, Art Forms (Princeton, 1965), pp.
reverse bears the inscription VICTORI-AAVGGG and shows 85-104.
both Valentinian and Theodosius II. The most interesting 52 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; Testi-Rasponi,
feature of the reverse is a human-headed serpent lying at the feet Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 47; Oost, Classical Philology 60
of Valentinian, who rests his cross scepter on it. Courcelle, (1965): p. 6; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp.
Melanges Andre Piganiol (Paris, 1966) 1: pp. 343-353, suggests 182, 193.
that this serpent, which appears in imperial issues until 474, pre- 53 This interpretation is implied in the explanation of Bury.
dominantly symbolized the Vandals, and perhaps especially Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 47, directly adopts it.
Geiseric. If this hypothesis be adopted, it could invalidate part 54 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 6-7. See below,
of Oost's observations regarding the depiction of the "exul" in pp. 51-54.
Merob. Carm. I 8. Since Valentinian represented the Vandals 5 Ibid., p. 6. One can reject Testi-Rasponi's interpretation
in total defeat on his solidus of 425, he might cause Huniric to that the wedding had not taken place at the writing of this poem.
be shown weeping in a mosaic of ca. 442. But Courcelle's See above, pp. 19-20. Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926):
identification raises a major difficulty which he himself recognizes p. 47, interprets vss. 5-10 as follows: "Al di fuori, sulla porta,
(p. 353): When Valentinian issued this solidus in 425, the Vandals e dipinta la Concordia (Cristo) . . .; all'interno, nel centro, come
were not a major threat to the Roman Empire. It is true that le lucenti stelle del sommo cielo e effigiato con la consorte l'impera-
they raided the Balearic Islands and attacked Carthago Spartaria tore (Teodosio II ed Eudossia), veneranda salute delle terre
(Cartagena) and Hispalis (Seville) during that year (cf. Courtois, (lOriente e l'Occidente), (dalla quale deriva che) invece che al
Les Vandales [Paris 1955], pp. 56 and 185), but such actions were nostro principe (Valentiniano III mandato in esilio insieme alla
not serious enough to cause Valentinian to suggest the Vandals madre e alla sorella da Onorio) tocchi al nuovo esule (il tiranno
(hopefully defeated) on a new coin type. Kaegi, Byzantium Giovanni) piangere la potenza cosi in breve perduta: a chi la
(Princeton, 1968), pp. 23-25, has recently presented a more con- natura (il diritto di nascita) diede il mondo, la vittoria lo ha
vincing interpretation of the meaning of the human-headed restituito e (per di piiu) una illustre aula (la corte di Bisanzio) da
serpent, at least for Valentinian: Since the serpent first appears on lontano gli appresta il letto maritale (gli sponsale con Eudossia)."
22 CLOVER: FLAVlUS MEROBAUDES [TRANS. AMER. PHIL. SOC.
Eudoxia. Deliberations over the place of marriage Galla Placidia might be depicted in an attitude of
seem to have delayed his arrival in the East, but finally
affection toward her son.60
he persuaded Theodosius that Constantinople was a The same observations may be made for lines 13-14.
suitable site. Valentinian arrived in that city on 21 This sentence is conditional in effect. Merobaudes
October; a week later, on 28 or 29 October, the wed- likens Valentinian's sister Honoria to the goddess
ding took place.56 Shortly after the ceremony Luna. Again the poet seems to remark only on the
Theodosius issued a commemorative solidus with the possible inclusion of Honoria in the mosaic decora-
reverse showing himself, Valentinian and Eudoxia, and tion.61 But whether she was depicted or not, it is
bearing the inscription "FELICITER NUBTIIS."57 significant that M1erobaudes should mention her in his
Merobaudes, then, devotes much of verses 5-10 to poem on the imperial family. This indicates that
meditating on a mosaic decoration showing Valen- when he wrote these verses around 443, Honoria was
tinian, Eudoxia, and Huniric at the center of a palace in good standing with her immediate relatives. The
room's ceiling. An abrupt "hic" in line 11 indicates implication of the poet's testimony conflicts with the
that he ceases his reflections and apparently turns to evidence
a of the chronicler Marcellinus, who dates to
scene of the mosaic.58 But instead of immediately the year 434 an affair of Honoria with a court official
launching into a description of other figures repre- named Eugenius, her -expulsion from Italy and her
sented, he uses conditions to remark on some members subsequent conspiracy with Attila the Hun.62 The
of the imperial family (11-16), thereby indicating that other sources uniformly place these incidents about
these persons perhaps did not appear on the decora- 449, shortly before Attila invaded the West.63 If
tion.59 Merobaudes' manner of portraying the im- Marcellinus' date is correct, one wonders why Mero-
perial personalities in verses 11-16 strongly suggests baudes showed Honoria in good esteem with her family
that he is indulging in a poet's imagination. He about nine years later. There have been unsatisfac-
states, for instance, that the "sacred parent" Galla tory attempts to reconcile the conflicting testimony by
Placidia seeks the kisses of her son Valentinian, and positin}g Honoria's return to good repute as of the time
compares the two to Latona and Apollo (11-12). Merobaudes wrote his poem, or by suggesting that
Now it is unlikely that a mosaic in the imperialMarcellinus
palace conflated a widely separated series of
would have depicted the Dowager Empress and her events.64 Bury advances the most cogent solution to
son in the casual act of kissing. Art work of the Later problem. Marcellinus erroneously placed his entry
this
Roman Empire was rigid and formal, especially when under the second year of the indiction running from
it represented an emperor and his immediate family. 433 to 448. The passage belongs in the second year of
Furthermore, it is difficult to imagine Placidia and her the following indiction, i.e., the year 449. In this new
son assuming the posture of pagan deities, for both position Marcellinus' note on Honoria fits the chronol-
were devout Christians. Thus the syntax and poetic ogy presented by the other sources.65 Possible sup-
expressions in verses 11-12 suggest that Merobaudes port for Bury's explanation comes from an inscription
returns to the palace mosaic (11) only to wish that set up by Galla Placidia, listing, among others, her
children, Valentinian and Honoria. Dessau reason-
561For the betrothal and marriage in general, cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. ably conjectures that the Dowager Empress erected
"Eudoxia" (2), RE 6, 1 (1907): pp. 925-926, at p. 925; and W.
the inscription before Honoria's disgrace, which he
Ensslin, s.V. "Valentinianus" (4), RE 7A, 2 (1948): p. 2235. The
dates surrounding Valentinian's marriage appear to be contra- places in 434, following the pre-Bury date of Marcel-
dictory. An eleventh-century edition of the Ravenna Fasti dates linus' testimony.66 But the inscription also names
Valentinian's departure from Italy to 15 July, and his marriage"Eudoxia Aug (usta)." Dessau takes this person to be
to 28 October. Cf. Bischoff and Koehler, Medieval Studies
(Cambridge, 1939) 1: p. 128, s.a. 437. On the other hand the 60 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5.
Chron. Pasch. s.a. 437 [Chron. min. 2: p. 79] states that Valen- 61 Ibid. In comparing Honoria to Luna, Merobaudes echoes
tinian entered Constantinople on 21 October and married Eudoxia Verg. Georg. I 396.
on 29 October. The discrepancy of one day regarding the date 62 Marcell. Corn. s.a. 437 [Chron. min. 2: p. 79].
of the wedding is relatively unimportant, but the time span 6 Cf. Prisc. Exc. deleg. gent. 7, 8 Eed. de Boor 1, 2: pp. 582-583];
between Valentinian's departure from Italy and his arrival at Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins. 84 Led. de Boor 3: pp. 124-125]; Jord. Get.
Constantiniople demands explanation. The dates of the Ravenna 223-224 and Rom. 328.
Annals and the Paschal Chronicle are probably correct here. The 64 Cf. Mommsen, Hermes 36 (1901): pp. 516-547, at p. 527, n. 2;
former is aware of the time of Valentinian's departure right to the and Vollmer, MGH.AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 13.
hour, while the latter gives an accurate account of the marriage 65 Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): pp. 1-13. Cf. Stein,
from an Eastern point of view. One possible explanation lies Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 333 and 581, n. 75; and Sirago,
in the fact that Valentinian and Theodosius deliberated over the Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 329, n. 1. Although he claims
site of the wedding. Cf. Socrat. VII 44. Perhaps Valentinian to have read Bury, Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 45,
corresponded with Theodosius en route. amazingly ignores Bury's basic conclusion and posits the year
57 Cf. 0. Ulrich-Bansa, Moneta mediolanensis (Venice, 1949), p. 434 as a terminus ante quem for the composition of Carmen I.
224; Zacos and Veglery, Spink and Son's Numismatic Circular 67 His reasoning: since Marcellinus dates Honoria's disgrace to 434,
(1959): pp. 154-155; and Zacos and Veglery, ibid. 68 (1960): Merobaudes must have written the ode before that date!
pp. 73-74. 66 Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1: no. 818. Bury, Jour.
58 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 3, takes account of only part of this
59 See above, p. 18. inscription.
the wife of Valentinian. Now Eudoxia received the in the same mythical framework. In this context the
title of Augusta in 438 or 439 after giving birth to a "vir" of line 18 is surely Achilles, son of Peleus and
daughter, Eudocia.67 If Dessau's identifications are Thetis, and Larisa is the Thessalian city which was one
correct, Honoria was in good grace at least four years of Achilles' mythical homes.74 It is unlikely that
after Marcellinus' given date for her expulsion. Larisa is the Thessalian nymph who gave her name
After dwelling on Honoria, Merobaudes continues to the city, and that her "vir" is Poseidon.75 Thus
his conditional manner of expression and in lines 15-16 Merobaudes, gazing at a mosaic scene depicting
remarks on another member of Valentinian's family: Eudocia, speculates that she may present Valentinian
his wife. In a manner strongly reminiscent of Catullus with a male grandchild equal in stature to Larisa's
64,68 the poet imagines that Eudoxia's presence would hero.
suggest the wedding of Peleus and Thetis. All recent Now it is noteworthy that Merobaudes predicts an
critics of this poem recognize that since Merobaudes offspring for Eudocia, especially if one considers her
refers to Eudoxia in the future tense and conditionally, age in ca. 443, the probable date of this poem. Eudocia
the empress did not appear in the mosaic scene from was apparently born not long before 6 August, 438 or
which Merobaudes abruptly departs in verses 11-16. 439. On 6 August-the year is uncertain-her mother
But they differ sharply in their deductions from this Eudoxia was proclaimed full empress at Ravenna.76
fact. Bury ignores the parallel constructions in these This honor customarily accrued to an emperor's wife
three distichs, and conjectures that the "coniux" (15) in late antiquity when she gave birth to a child. One
is the future husband of Honoria.69 Testi-Rasponi of the Gallic chronicles helps to pinpoint the year by
maintains that the wife is indeed Eudoxia, but wrongly dating to 438 the Vandal capture of Carthage and
interprets the future protasis of the condition (15) Eudoxia's proclamation.77 Since the actual year of
to mean that she and Valentinian were not yet Carthage's subjugation is 439, it is possible that
married.70 Oost presents the most convincing exegesis Eudoxia's accession also occurred in that year.78 It is
of this sentence. Merobaudes slips into the future in equally possible, however, that she attained the throne
lines 15-16 because he is continuing to speculate on the in 438, and that the Gallic chronicler misplaced the
basis of the mosaic in the palace room. The possible attack on Carthage by one year. The time span from
inclusion of Eudoxia in this cluster calls to mind one of 28 or 29 October, 437-the date of Eudoxia's wedding
the most illustrious weddings in mythology.7' -to 6 August of the following year is approximately
With verse 16 Merobaudes ends his description of or nine months. Thus Eudocia was about four or five
reflections on the senior members of the emperor's years old when Merobaudes wrote his ode. For a
family, and in lines 17-23 he turns to Eudocia and child so young the poet's expectation of an offspring
Placidia, the daughters of Valentinian and Eudoxia. may be idle speculation, but the fact that he specifi-
The elder daughter Eudocia naturally comes first cally augurs a male grandchild for Valentinian suggests
(17-18), and the poet's use of the adjectival pronoun a more likely interpretation. The Emperor had be-
"hac" suggests that the mosaic actually depicted her.72 trothed his elder daughter in expectation of continuing
But before he passes on to her sister, Merobaudes his lineage.79
pauses to meditate on the representation of Eudocia.73
Since the poet's reflections probably indicate a major
74 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 17; and
cornerstone of imperial foreign policy in the 440's, it is
Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 176, n. 21. For the
important to understand just what he is saying here. literary association of Achilles with Larisa, see, for example,
It has already been noted that Merobaudes wrote this Verg. Aen. II197, with Servius' commentary ad loc. I am grate-
piece with Catullus 64 partially in mind. Nowhere is ful to Professor J. P. Heironimus for his assistance on this
passage.
this more evident than in verses 15-18. In lines 15-16
75 So Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8; cf. Oost,
the poet clearly alludes to the wedding of Peleus and Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 10, n. 29. For the nymph
Thetis, the nominal subject of Catullus' work. At Larisa, cf. Stoll, s.v. "Larissa" (1), Ausfuihrliches Lexikon der
verses 17-18 he rather ineptly continues this reminis- griechischen und romischen Mythologie, ed. W. Roscher (Leipzig,
1894-1897) 2: pp. 1898-1901.
cence (cf. "etiam"), and makes further observations
76 Agnellus 31. In his edition of the Consularia italica,
Mommsen, Chron. min. 1: p. 301, tentatively dates Agnellus'
87 See below, pp. 23-24. entry to 438.
88 Cf. Vollmer, MGH.AA 14: p. 3, ad Merob. Carm. I 17. 77 Chron. Gall. a. DXI 598 and 599 [Chron. mmin. 1: p. 661].
69 Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8, n. 3. See Other
above,evidence for the event yields no information regarding
p. 19.
the date. Cf. Polemius Silvius 83 [ibid., p. 523]; Dessau,
70 Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45-46. See Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1: nos. 818-819; and Cohen, Midailles
above, pp. 19-20. On the basis of this mistake, T.-R. draws impgriales (Paris, 1892) 8: p. 218.
many of his other conclusions. 78 Cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. "Eudoxia" (2), RE 6, 1 (1907): p. 925;
71 Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5. and W. Ensslin, s.v. "Valentinianus" (4), RE 7A, 2 (1948):
72 Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 8. Bury cau-p. 2237.
tiously suggests that Eudocia appeared in one of several scenes of 79See the commentary on Carm. II 13-14, p. 28, for simi-
the mosaic. lar expectations on Merobaudes' part. Testi-Rasponi, Felix
78 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 5. Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45-46, recognizes that Merobaudes is
But to whom did Valentinian engage Eudocia? An Eudocia's maternal grandfather, betrothed his daugh-
examination of the evidence for her life makes it ter Eudoxia to Valentinian in 424, when they were aged
probable that her betrothed was Huniric, the son of two and five, respectively.85 At that time the usurpa-
the Vandal King Geiseric. After Geiseric sacked tion of John required Theodosius to take prompt action
Rome in 455, he took Eudocia, her mother and her in order to maintain his family's succession in the
younger sister back to Carthage with him as captives. West. In 442 the Vandal threat made it expedient
Around the end of 456 he married Eudocia to Huniric.80 that Valentinian arrange a future marraige on the spot.
This is the first definite record of Eudocia's marriage. Geiseric probably would not have consented to a mere
Merobaudes himself shows that Geiseric did not select promise of an engagement.86
a bride for Huniric at random. In his panegyric of After reflecting on the future offspring of Eudocia
446 the poet alludes to a future offspring in terms and Huniric, Merobaudes proceeds to discuss Val-
which can only mean that Valentinian and Geiseric entinian's younger daughter Placidia in verses 19-23.
had agreed to link their houses by marriage.81 In view As noted above, the particle "en" (19) suggests that
of Geiseric's action in 456, Huniric and Eudocia were the mosaic actually represented her. But since it
affianced no later than 446. And since Merobaudes would be difficult to picture an infant carrying sacred
apparently alludes to Eudocia's betrothal and to rites in her heart (20), or moving her mouth to cry
Huniric's presence at the imperial court around 443, it (22), it again seems likely that the poet is meditating
is likely that Valentinian and Geiseric agreed to the on the basis of a formal portrait. In the poet's vision,
engagement at about this time. Apparently they Placidia is a "new offspring," recently born (19). At
reached an accord on this in conjunction with the the writing of this poem she already has received
treaty of 442. According to Merobaudes, then, the "imystic rites" (20), and she attests the presence of a
future marriage of Eudocia and Huniric will present god within her by her cries (21). She now, it appears,
Valentinian with a male grandchild of Achilles' stature. possesses a "double life" (23). Surely the poet is
In view of the apparent strength of the Vandals in the referring to Placidia's baptism shortly after her birth.
440's, this analogy is not entirely inept.82 Placidia has attested God's presence within her by
But if Eudocia's age as of ca.443 provides a signifi- taking the sacrament of baptism. In doing this she
cant clue to the meaning of lines 17-18, it also raises a obtains a dual life-carnal by her birth, spiritual by
problem for the interpretation presented above. At the Christian ritual. Evidently the manner in which
most Eudocia was about five years old when Mero- the mosaic depicted Placidia called to Merobaudes'
baudes wrote this poem. Throughout the Roman mind her recent baptism.87 Now the practice of infant
Empire the general legal minimum for betrothal was baptism to which Merobaudes alludes was current
,seven years.83 If Valentinian III adhered to legal among orthodox Christians in the fifth century.88
principles at this point, he would have delayed the
85 Cf. Marcell. com. s.aa. 422 and 424 [Chron. min. 2: pp. 75-
actual betrothal until 445/6.84 But it appears that 76]; 0. Seeck, s.v. "Eudoxia" (2), RE 6, 1 (1907): p. 925; and W.
the House of Theodosius had no qualms about ignor- Ensslin, s.v. "Valentinianus" (4), RE 7A, 2 (1948): pp. 2232-2233.
ing such rules when political circumstances demanded 86 In this context the generally accepted date for the betrothal
(see above, n. 84) is based on the unnecessary assumption that
an earlier engagement. For example, Theodosius II,
the event took place immediately prior to the delivery of Mero-
baudes' Panegyric II.
speaking of a betrothal here, but identifies the "proles" (17) with 87 In vs. 21 Merobaudes echose Verg. Aen. II 591: "confessa
Valentinian. See above, p. 19. deam." There is general agreement that Merobaudes alludes
80 Cf. Theophan. 5964 [ed. de Boor 1: p. 118]; Zon. XIII 25, to Placidia's baptism here. Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 3, ad
29; Niceph. XV 12 [PG 147: p. 40]; and Courtois, Les Vandales Merob. Carm. I 19 and 23; Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919):
(Paris, 1955), append. 3, no. 17, pp. 396-397. pp. 7-8; and Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 4-5. Bury
81 Merob. Paneg. II 23-29. See below, pp. 51-54. suggests that the mosaic showed Placidia's baptism. Oost
82 Merob. Carm. I 7-8, 17-18. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 attributes the action in vs. 20 to the poet's imagination.
(1919): pp. 7-8, maintains that vss. 17-18 refer to the engage- 88 Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 44, denies that
ment of Eudocia and Huniric, but he bases this conjecture on an infants were baptized in the fifth century. This supposition
erroneous identification of the "vir" and "Larisa" of vs. 18 (see forms the basis of his conjecture (p. 45) that the "suboles" (19)
above, p. 23). Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): pp. 5-6, is an unborn catechumen (see above, p. 19). It is true that the
puts Bury's suggestion on a firmer basis by identifying thepractice "exile" of delaying baptism, which was common in the fourth
of vs. 8 as Huniric, and by linking the future marriage to the century, is still attested in the fifth century. Cf. Camelot, La
treaty of 442. For further discussion of the events surrounding Maison-Dieu 88 (1966): p. 28. But infant baptism is directly
this treaty, see below, pp. 51-54. attested as early as the third century, and by the fifth-century
83 Cf. Dig. XXIII 1, 14 (Modestinus); Nov. Leon. CIX; and orthodox Christianity, chiefly through the efforts of St. Augustine,
Durry, Comptes rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles- fully endorsed it. Cf. von Harnack, History of Dogma (New
Lettres 1955: p. 87. York, 1958) 2: pp. 140-143, and 4: pp. 283-284, n. 1; Jeremias,
84This is the standard date for the engagement, based on Infant Baptism (London, 1960), pp. 87-97, et passim; Aland,
Merob. Paneg. II 23-29. Cf. 0. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (London, 1963), pp. 100-
1921) 6: pp. 122 and 422; Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 101, et passim; Jeremias, The Origins of Infant Baptism (London,
,95-97; Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: p. 326; Gitti, Ricerche 1963), passim; Aland, Die Sauglingstaufe (Munich, 1963), passim;
(Bari, 1953), pp. 13-31; and Courtois, Les Vandales (Paris, 1955), and Aland, Die Stellung der Kinder (Munich, 1967), p. 26, et
-append. 3, no. 15, pp. 395-396. passim. The Jeremias-Aland controversy is perhaps typical of
Mark the Deacon's account of the baptism of the Valentinian, then, seemingly waited until ca. 450
infant Theodosius II shows that Valentinian was not to affiance Placidia. If he adhered to the legal mini-
the only member of the House of Theodosius to adhere mum of seven years for betrothal, Placidia would have
to it.89 been born no later than ca. 443. But without further
The birth and baptism of Placidia are apparently evidence this hypothetical data is useless, for Val-
two of the most recent occurrences to which iMiero- entinian did not hesitate to arrange a marriage for
baudes refers. The poet probably wrote Carmen I Eudocia before she reached the age of seven.95 It is
shortly after the palace mosaic at least suggested these necessary to look to the date of Placidia's earliest
events.90 Thus it is vital to the dating of this poem known marriage for confirmation. The contemporary
to determine just when Placidia was born and-in chronicler Hydatius probably indicates that Placidia
keeping with contemporary custom-immediately first married in 455. He notes that after the assassina-
baptized. Certainly her birth occurred ca. 439 or tion of Valentinian III (16 MIarch, 455) the usurper
440-no less than about a year following that of Emperor Petronius Miaximus (17 March-31 MIay, 455)
Eudocia. But beyond this one can only arrive at a wedded his son Palladius to a "Valentiniani filia."
terminus ante quem based on the presumed date of her Now the "daughter of Valentinian" to whom Hydatius
earliest betrothal and marriage. Around 450 Val- refers is probably Placidia rather than Eudocia. The
entinian apparently initiated at least tentative plans betrothal of Eudocia and Huniric was apparently still
for Placidia's marriage. At first he seems to have in effect in 455, and in his precarious position Maximus
chosen the future Western Emperor Majorian (457- would not have dared to tamper with it.96 But the
461) as her intended husband, but soon Aetius removed usurper's own marriage and that of his son did not last
Miajorian from court and substituted his younger son long. On 31 May, 455, the mob at Rome killed
Gaudentius as her betrothed.9" This engagement iXlaximus just before Geiseric entered the city to sack
lasted until 21 or 22 September, 454, when Valentinian it. Presumably Palladius perished with his father.97
assassinated Aetius with his own hand.92 The chroni- The Greek sources ignore and in some cases con-
cler Prosper indicates that at the time of the assassina- tradict Hydatius' testimony regarding Placidia's
tion one of Aetius' chief concerns was the betrothal of marriage. They know of Placidia's wedlock with the
his and the emperor's offspring-probably Gaudentius Senator and future Western Emperor Olybrius (472),
and Placidia.93 There is no evidence, however, that and they relate it in various ways to the aftermath of
the marriage took place. Presumably Valentinian the Vandal sack of Rome (June, 455), when Geiseric
canceled the engagement after murdering Aetius.94 took Placidia, her mother and sister back to Carthage
as captives. A tradition based primarily on the con-
recent thinking about infant baptism. Both men agree that it temporary historian Priscus of Panium apparently
was current in the fifth century, but they disagree concerning its
dates this marriage to the early 460's-certainly no
origin and significance in earlier centuries. See also Didier,
Faut-il baptiser les enfants? (Paris, 1967), pp. 119-139, 205-206, later than 462.98 Significantly Hydatius presents a
et passim; P. Hill, s.v. "Baptism of Infants," New Catholic
Encyclopedia (New York, 1967) 2: pp. 69-71; and Strobel, 95 See above, pp. 23-24.
Begrundung und Gebrauch der heiligen Taufe (Berlin, 1963), pp. 96 Hydat. 162 [Chron. min. 2: p. 27]. Several students of the
7-69. events of 455 take Palladius' spouse to be Eudocia. Cf. Gitti,
89 Marc. diac. V. Porphyrii 44-47. Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 19, 54, et passim; Schmidt, Histoire
0 Merob. Carm. I 19: "iam," "vix modo"; and 20: "iam." (Paris, 1953), p. 97; and Ensslin, s.v. "Placidia" (2), RE 20, 2
Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): pp. 7-8. (1950): pp. 1931-1932. The argument presented here against
91 Cf. Sidon, Carm. V 126-304 (esp. 203-206), as elucidated by this identification is that of Oost, Classical Philology 59 (1964):
Oost, Classical Philology 59 (1964): pp. 23-29; and Oost, Galla pp. 27-28. In support of Oost one may note that there is no
Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp. 286-287. mention in any source that Eudocia was wedded prior to her
92 The Cons. Ital. s.a. 454 [Chron. min. 1: p. 303] gives the gen- with Huniric in 456. Indeed, Malal. XIV [CSHB 15:
marriage
erally accepted date of 21 September for the assassination. Cf. p. 366]-admittedly an unreliable source at this point-states
Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: p. 348. But the eleventh-century that when Geiseric took her captive to Carthage in June 455 she
fragment of the Fasti Ravennati dates the event to 22 September. was a virgin. In general, see 0. Seeck, s.v. "Eudokia" (2), RE
Cf. Bischoff and Kohler, Medieval Studies (Cambridge, 1939) 1: 6, 1 (1907): p. 912.
p. 129, s.a. 454. 97 Cf. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: p. 324; and
9 Prosp. 1373 [Chron. min 1: p. 483]. See also Joh. Ant. Oost, Classical Philology 59 (1964): p. 28. Many students of
Exc. de ins. 85 Eed. de Boor 3: p. 125], where at the time of this period point to Geiseric's swift reaction to Maximus' usurpa-
assassination Valentinian angrily accuses Aetius of wanting to tion as evidence that the latter did marry his son to Eudocia (see
take from him "the power of the West." This is probably in part above, n. 96). But the real reason for this action seems to have
a reference to the betrothal of Gaudentius and Placidia. Gitti, been Geiseric's desire to offset an attempt of the Gallo-Romans
Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 56-59, is wrong in suggesting that and the Visigoths to influence the imperial succession. Cf.
Eudocia was Gaudentius' betrothed. Any attempt to tamper Clover, "Geiseric the Statesman" (Diss., Chicago, 1966), pp.
with the engagement of Eudocia and Huniric would bring down 138-162.
the wrath of Geiseric. A projected marriage in the imperial 98 Prisc. Exc. de leg. Rom. 10 Eed. de Boor 1, 1: p. 153]. Cf.
family at this time probably involved Placidia. Cf. Oost, Procop. Bell. Vand. I 5, 6 and 6, 6; and Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins.
Classical Philology 59 (1964): pp. 27-28. 88 Eed. de Boor 3: p. 129]. For the dates of the relevant frag-
94 Cf. W. Ensslin, s.v. "Placidia" (2), RE 20, 2 (1950): pp. ments of Priscus and John of Antioch, cf. Gordon, The Age of
1931-1932, at p. 1931. Attila (Ann Arbor, 1960), pp. 189 and 192. For Priscus as one of
similar chronology.99 But later sources give a different ing the sack of Rome and its aftermath: At the time
picture. According to the sixth-century church his- of Geiseric's attack on the city Olybrius was in Con-
torian Evagrius, the Eastern Emperor Marcian stantinople. If this testimony is true, perhaps
arranged the wedding after he persuaded Geiseric to Geiseric summoned Olybrius from Constantinople and
allow Placidia and her mother to go to Constantinople. arranged his marriage to Placidia at Carthage.l02
The testimony may derive partly from the sixth- Given the probable date of 455 for Placidia's earliest
century chronicler John Malalas, and as it stands it is marriage, it is possible to establish a terminus ante quem
nearly useless. Marcian reigned from 450 to 457, and for her birth. According to Roman law a girl was
the most reliable sources place the release of Eudoxia generally eligible to marry upon completion of her
and Placidia in 462, during the reign of the Eastern twelfth year.'03 If Petronius Maximus observed the
Emperor Leo J.100 Another late tradition stemming legal minimum, Placidia was born no later than 443.
primarily from Malalas and Theophanes-the latter Thus the hypothetical birthday based on the time of
being a chronicler of the eighth century-holds that her betrothal stands somewhat confirmed. But this
Placidia was married to Olybrius before Geiseric date is not certain. Durry has recently shown that
carried her off to Carthage. A variant of this same there was a brutal reality behind the legal ruling. The
narrative appears first in the chronicle of John Romans practiced marriage with or without con-
Zonaras, who wrote in the early twelfth century: At summation on girls who had not reached puberty.
the time of her captivity beginning 455, Placidia was The legal minimum of twelve years, two years before
betrothed to Olybrius.101 Now none of the Greek the normal age for puberty and indeed two years less
sources later than the fifth century appear to have any than the minimum age for boys, was merely an attempt
definite information regarding the wedding of Olybrius to contain this custom.104 Thus Petronius Maximus
and Placidia. Even Malalas, the earliest of them, may have married Placidia to his son before she had
erroneously places the recovery of Eudoxia and completed her twelfth year. But in view of the cir-
Placidia in the reign of Marcian. The evidence of cumstances under which the marriage took place, this
these sources conflicts in one way or another with that is unlikely. In Maximus' time Christianity gave its
of Priscus, and Priscus agrees with Hydatius, another support to the legal formula for marriage.105 As a
contemporary. Thus it appears that Placidia married usurper Maximus was in a precarious position. It is
Olybrius after the sack of Rome in 455. Certainly scarcely conceivable that he would transgress legal
the wedding took place by 462. At best the later bounds and religious sentiment in marrying his son to
Greek sources may present a significant detail regard- Placidia.
Thus it appears that Placidia was born and im-
Procopius' sources in the pertinent chapters of the Bellum vanda- mediately baptized no earlier than 439/40 and no later
licum, cf. B. Rubin, "Prokopios von Kaisareia," RE 23, 1 (1957):
than 443.106 Merobaudes' apparent reference to the
pp. 273-599, at pp. 406-407. For John of Antioch's use of
Priscus here, cf. Muller, Fragmenta (Paris, 1851) 4: p. 616, ad
Joh. Ant. frg. 204. 102 Cf. Evagr. II 7; Malal. XIV [CSHB 15: p. 366]; and
99 Hydat. 216 [Chron. min. 2: p. 32]. Niceph. XV 11 [PG 147: p. 37]. This seems to follow also from
100 Evagr. II 7. Cf. Malal. XIV [CSHB 15: p. 368]. Since Hydat. 216 [Chron. min. 2: p. 32]. Since Nicephorus used
Evagrius occasionally used Malalas as one of his sources, he may Evagrius here (see above, n. 101), and since Evagrius occasionally
have based this account partially on Malalas. Cf. Moravcsik, used Malalas (see above, n. 100), this evidence may stem ulti-
Byzantinoturcica (Berlin, 1958) 1: p. 258. For the recovery of mately from Malalas. 0. Seeck, s.v. "Anicius" (52), RE 1, 2
Eudoxia and her daughter in 462, cf. Stein, Histoire (Berlin, (1894): pp. 2207-2208, maintains that the marriage took place
1959) 1: p. 387. in Africa. Certainly Geiseric made full political capital out of
101 Malal. XIV [CSHB 15: pp. 366, 368, 373-374]; Theophan. this wedding. Cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 366-367,
5947, 5949, 5964 Eed. de Boor 1: pp. 109-110, 118]. Since 387. For the general analysis of the sources here and the
Malalas was one of Theophanes' sources for the fifth century, probable date of Placidia's second marriage, cf. Oost, Classical
it is possible that Theophanes made partial use of him here. Cf. Philology 59 (1964): pp. 2 7-28.
G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica (Berlin, 1958) 1: p. 532. Cedre- 103 Cf. Corbett, Roman Law (Oxford, 1930), p. 51.
nus [CSHB 34: p. 606] merely copies Theophanes, one of the 104 Durry, Comptes rendus de l'Acade'mie des Inscriptions et
major sources for his compendium. Cf. Krumbacher, Geschichte Belles-Lettres, 1955: pp. 84-91; Durry, Anthropos 50 (1955): pp.
(New York, no date) 1: p. 369. The version of Zonaras XIII 25, 432-434; Durry, Revue internationale des droits de l'antiquite, ser.
27-28 differs somewhat from that of Malalas and Theophanes. 3, 2 (1955): pp. 263-273; Durry, ibid. 3 (1956): pp. 227-243;
But since he records his information in language reminiscent of Durry Gymnasium 63 (1956): pp. 187-190; contra Reinach,
Theophanes, and since his sources for this period include Malalas, Revue historique de droit frantais et etranger, ser. 4, 34 (1956):
Theophanes and Cedrenus, it seems likely that he derived part pp. 268-273; cf. Garcia Garrido, Labeo 3 (1957): pp. 76-88.
of his narrative from this earlier tradition. Cf. Moravcsik, Durry's analysis has been accepted by Mazzarino, Ancient
Byzantinoturcica 1: p. 345. Niceph. XV 11 [PG 147: p. 37] World (London, 1966), p. 126.
jumbles many of the earlier Greek versions together. He adopts 105 Cf. Durry, Gymnasium 63 (1956): pp. 187-190.
the testimony of Evagrius, his basic source, but also includes the 106 Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: p. 318, implies that
tradition(s) presented by Theophanes, Cedrenus and Zonaras. Placidia was born ca. 442 on the basis of her presumed betrothal to
Cf. Gentz and Winkelmann, Die Kirchengeschichte des Nicephorus Aetius' son in 454. Since this marriage probably did not take
(Berlin, 1966), pp. 146-147. For a schema of the Greek sources place, there is no way of knowing whether Placidia could have
concerning the fate of Eudoxia and her daughters following the legally married in 454. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919):
sack of Rome, cf. Tricca, Roma e l'Oriente 10 (1915): pp. 136-141. p. 7, holds that Placidia was married to Olybrius in 455 before
betrothal of Eudocia and Huniric, which presumably in Carmen I Merobaudes states that the Emperor
took place about 442, confirms and helps pinpoint the Valentinian with his wife Eudoxia "possesses the center
date to 442 or 443. Both Eudocia and Placidia, of the ceiling"-that is the imperial couple apparently
together with their parents, seemingly appeared on a constitutes the center of a mosaic at the top of a palace
mosaic in one of the palace rooms at Ravenna. room. At verse 9 of his second piece the poet notes an
Shortly after the mosaic was completed, perhaps in emperor and his wife (whose identity will be discussed
443,107 the court poet Merobaudes used it as the basis below) occuping the "[?] mina celsa." In effect
for some verses on the family of Valentinian III. Merobaudes echoes the remarks he made in Carmen
I.7 Because of this repetition it is possible that in
CARMEN II Carmen II the poet describes a mosaic decoration on a
palace ceiling which depicted the emperor and empress.
This poem is obviously related to Carmen I. Critics In order words, this second poem, like the first, may
generally agree that the subject of this second piece is a be an ekphrasis of a work of art.
baptism.' But there is another possible interpreta- But if Merobaudes again describes a picture, it is
tion: the baptism may not be the subject, but an difficult-as in the case of Carmen I-to determine its
important event to which Merobaudes alludes. The contents. The "iuventa" of line 1 may have appeared
poet may have selected a palace mosaic as the setting in the mosaic, but it is also possible that the composi-
for his reflections on this event. tion merely caused the poet to think of her.8 As the
Admittedly there is good support for the conclusion poet reflected on this scene the sun's rays apparently
that the poem's theme is a baptism. Verses 5-8 streamed in through a window and illuminated a
probably describe a marble baptismal font decorated portrait of the purple-clothed emperor (verse 3)-per-
with metal stags and jewels.2 But Merobaudes has haps the same portrait as the one noted in line 9.9
more to say about the scene of his meditations. The The baptismal font mentioned in verses 5-8 was pro-
general location of the font is apparently an "aula" bably not part of the mosaic. Merobaudes' descrip-
(verse 1). Testi-Rasponi argues that the "aula" is a tion of it is so vivid as to suggest that it was actually
church, probably that of Santa Croce at Ravenna.3 placed in the room'0 The mention of the "iuventa"
But this is unlikely. Although aula can mean a earlier in the poem indicates the reason for the atten-
church in later Latin,4 Merobaudes uses the word tion Merobaudes gives to the baptismal apparatus:
elsewhere in his works to mean "court."5 Further- At the time the poet wrote this poem the child was
more, the poet employs pagan imagery in part of this baptized." But if the baptismal font was not de-
piece, and one might expect him to do this in a secular picted, it seems likely that the emperor and his wife
rather than an ecclesiastical setting. Thus the "aula figured prominently in the mosaic decoration. As
domini" (verse 1) is probably the court of the emperor. noted above, they seemingly appeared on the ceiling
As in the case of Carmen I, it is possible that the of the palace room (verse 9). Their child or children
general environment of the poem is the palace ad may have taken position with them, or at least the
Laureta at Ravenna.6 representation of their parents called the offspring
Of course the baptismal font which Merobaudes to the poet's mind (line 10). In the former case the
mentions would not be located in the palace as a whole, art work would have pictured the "mundus"-per-
but in one of its rooms. At verses 2-4 the poet seem- haps a large group of people-standing admiringly in
ingly narrows his vision when he notices the play of the presence of the imperial family.
light on the "tecta." This word could mean "dwell- Thus Merobaudes seemingly chose as the subject of
ing," that is the entire palace, but it could also signify his poem a mosaic decoration showing at least the
the "ceiling" of a palace room. In a similar passage
7Compare Merob. Carm. I 5-6 with Carm. II 2-4, 9. Vollmer
Geiseric took Rome, and concludes, wrongly from the standpoint MGH:AA 14: p. 4, notices the similarity here. Olajos, Antik
of Roman law, that she was born no later than 440. Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 177, n. 24, ignores the parallel and
107 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 6. suggests that vs. 9 refers to an elevated entrance to the imperial
palace where the imperial couple received the people.
1 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: pp. 3-4; Bury, Jour. Roman
8 The fact that the ceiling is aglitter with "youthful light"
Studies 9 (1919): p. 7, n. 2; Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31
(Merob. Carm. II 2) lends weight to the former possibility.
(1926): p. 44; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): pp.
9 The mention of Phoebus' chariot (Merob. Carm. II 3) is
175-177.
probably an allusion to the sun's rays. Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Mero-
2 Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. 3;
baudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. 3; and Testi-Rasponi,
Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 4, ad Merob. Carm. II 6; and Testi-
Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 45. For the separate identity of the
Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45-46.
"iuventa" (vs. 1) and the "princeps" (vs. 3), see below.
3 Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 44 and 46. 10 One cannot totally dismiss the possibility that Merobaudes
Cf. Souter, Glossary (Oxford, 1949), s.v. "aula." notes a depiction of a baptismal font and imagines water flowing
6 Merob. Carm. I 10, Carm. II 14, Paneg. II 58. into it. In the famous mosaic of Justinian and Theodora at the
6 For Carmen I, cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 7. Church of San Vitale in Ravenna, there appears a small fountain
Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): p. 46, suggests but with flowing water. Cf. Grabar, L'dge d'or (Paris, 1966), p. 161.
dismisses this palace as a possible setting for Carmen II. 11 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: pp. 3-4.
emperor and his wife, and bringing to mind other ters in line 10, he confidently asserts that the male
members of the imperial family. The baptism of a lineage of the House of Theodosius will continue itself.
"iuventa" was one of the main occurrences suggested Since Valentinian and Eudoxia had no male offspring,
to the poet by the artistic representation and the Merobaudes may refer here to the betrothal of Eudocia
baptismal font in the palace room. Since the subject and Huniric, which took place around 442. In allud-
and events of Carmina I and II appear to be similar, ing to Eudocia's engagement in Carmen I, Merobaudes
one might expect Merobaudes to refer to roughly the has similar confidence that a male progeny will result
same members of the same imperial family. Vollmer from her marriage.'8 Thus it appears that Carmen II,
takes the "iuventa" to be Placidia, the recently bap- like Carmen I, dates from shortly after 442.
tized daughter of Valentinian III, her "dominus"
(1).12 By this interpretation the "princeps" in line CARMEN III
3 is again Valentinian, who also appears in verse 9
The extant portion of this poem shows that it, like
with his wife Eudoxia. And if one takes Merobaudes'
Carmina I and II, is an ekphrasis. The subject of this
use of the plural at face value, the "pignora" of line
piece, however, is not a work of art, but a wood or
10 are both Placidia and her elder sister Eudocia.
garden with closely trimmed trees. The attention
But Testi-Rasponi identifies the characters in a dif-
given to the trees suggests a privately owned enclosure.
ferent fashion. The "iuventa" (1) is the child
But only the presumed title of the poem indicates the
Valentinian, and verses 2-4 merely elaborate on him.
location and owner of the plot.
The "tecta" (2) glitter from his youthful light mingled
When Niebuhr published the editio princeps of the
with Phoebus' rays and the splendor of his imperial
Codex sangallensis 908 in 1823, he read the following
trappings. In other words, the "iuventa" (1) and
title to the poem: "Ridiari. uiri inl. ... t," with per-
the "princeps" (3) are identical.13 But this elucida-
haps an "s" at the end of "Ridiari" and "usti" or
tion stems from a misreading of verses 2-4. It is true
"uoti" clustered around the "t."' In his corrected
that the ceiling shines from the youthful light of the
edition of 1824 he was able to make out the following
"iuventa" (2). But it is also "set on fire" by two
heading by treatment of the manuscript: "[VI]
other forces, the sun's rays and the emperor with his
RIDIARIS VIRI INL. FAUSTI. " 2 Later on in the
trappings (3). Ultimately these two additional agents
century Buicheler read only "DIAR," while at the turn
blend together like heavenly and earthly stars (4).14
of the century Vollmer saw no title at all.3
It would be needless repetition to say that the youthful
There is prosopographical evidence to support
light of Valentinian causes the ceiling to shine (2),
Niebuhr's doubtful reading. The Faustus of Nie-
and then to state that Valentinian and the sun's rays
buhr's title is probably Anicius Acilius Glabrio
set it on fire with light (3-4). There are probably
Faustus, a distinguished senator who was an older
three instead of two entities acting to brighten up the
contemporary of Merobaudes. From the 420's
room: the offspring, the sun's rays and the emperor.
through the 440's Faustus was Urban Prefect three
Thus the "iuventa" (1) and the "princeps" (3) are not
times, Praetorian Prefect of Italy twice and consul
identical. Indeed it seems more natural to regard the
once (438).4 In contrast to Mlerobaudes, who pursued
"dominus" of line 1 and the "princeps" of lines 3 and
a military career, Faustus held civil positions through-
9 as the same man. Vollmer's identification may
out his official life. But there was one point at which
stand.
the professions of the two men were parallel. An
Carmina I and II, then, are similar with respect to inscription honoring Faustus in 437 indicates that
subject, events discussed, and personalities. Given prior to his first urban prefecture, which he attained
the close correspondence between the two poems it not long before 423, he was "comes intra consis-
seems possible that Merobaudes wrote them at about torium."5 As of 435 AiIerobaudes was also Count of
the same time. Indeed, the mention of what is
probably Placidia's baptism in the second piece sug- 16 See above, pp. 23-24. Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13
(1966): pp. 175-177, suggests that Merob. Carm. II 9-14 de-
gests that the poet composed it around 443, that is
scribes the mass celebrating the child's birth and Eudoxia's
shortly after the girl's birth and reception into the attainment of the title of Augusta. This interpretation does not
Church.'5 Verses 11-14 offer tentative confirmation take account of the parallel between Carm. I 17-18 and Carm.
of this chronology. Here Merobaudes apparently II 11-14. In both cases Merobaudes is speaking of new male
rulers.
ceases to describe the details of the mosaic and the
1 Niebuhr, Merobaudis reliquiae (St. Gall, 1823), p. 3.
baptismal font, and begins to reflect on the overall 2 Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. 3.
scene. Having remarked on Valentinian's two daugh- 3 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 4. Buicheler's reading in the
Index scholarum of the University of Bonn for 1877 is unavailable
12 Ibid. Cf. Bury, Jour. Roman Studies 9 (1919): p. 7, n. 2. to me.
13 Testi-Rasponi, Felix Ravenna 31 (1926): pp. 45-46. T.-R. 4 Cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. "Faustus" (13), RE 6, 2 (1909): p. 2092;
makes no attempt to identify the "dominus" (vs. 1), the "princeps Sundwall, Westromische Studien (Berlin, 1915), pp. 75-76, no.
cum coniuge" (vs. 9) and their "pignora" (vs. 10). 167; and Chastagnol, Les fastes (Paris, 1962), pp. 286-289, no.
14 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 410, s.z. "sidus." 128.
15 See above, pp. 24-27. 5 Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1: no. 1283. For the
the Consistory.6 Now it is unlikely that MIerobaudes are more explicit concerning the younger son,
and Faustus sat in the Sacred Consistory together. Gaudentius. As of 454 he was probably betrothed to
Ex-officio membership in the Consistory changed Valentinian's younger daughter, Placidia. In the
rapidly, since it was unusual for one man to hold any following year Geiseric took him captive to Carthage
of the qualifying offices more than two or three years.7 after sacking Rome. In the early 460's Gaudentius
Still it is possible that Faustus gave Merobaudes advice was apparently still alive in Carthage.' There can be
while the latter was in the Consistory, and assisted him little doubt that the infant whose birthday MIero-
in the advancement of his career. baudes celebrates is Gaudentius. This poem is nearly
Further evidence to support Niebuhr comes from complete, and there is no mention of the "puer" (2)
the senatorial rank of inlustris, which the Faustus of being a hostage to Attila. M\ore significantly, Mero-
Merobaudes' poem presumably held. The Gesta baudes' description of the boy's mother fits the poet
Senatus romani de Theodosiano publicando, dated 438, Sidonius Apollinaris' depiction of the mother of
designates Faustus as "vir clarissimus et inlustris."8 Gaudentius.6
In the Constitutio de constitutionariis of 443 he appears
From the poetic allusions in MiNerobaudes' genethli-
as "vir inlustris."9 Thus by the late 430's or early akon it is possible to determine Gaudentius' date of
440's Faustus attained the same senatorial rank with birth with a fair amount of accuracy. At first glance
which Merobaudes seemingly credits him. If it appears that in verses 5-11 Merobaudes is embellish-
Niebuhr's reading is correct, Merobaudes probably ing the birthday poem with a description of all the
wrote this poem about the same time as his other seasons of the year. But a closer consideration
surviving carmina. In it he described a pleasure- indicates that the poet is discussing one season: He
garden of his friend Faustus, whose home was ad asks for blooming vegetation on the one hand and a
Palmam in Rome.10 wintry Tiber on the other. Such a contradictory
request seems to fit late winter or early spring. The
CARMEN IV fact that the poet singles out this season for discussion
suggests that Gaudentius was born at that time. Line
The subject, imagery, and meter of this birthday
38 of the poem establishes his birthplace as the city of
poem show that Merobaudes derived his inspiration
from the Genethliacon Lucani of Statius.1 But Rome.7 Verses 34-36 show that only a long gestation
permitted Gaudentius' birth there. This of course
Merobaudes did not copy Statius to the point of
honoring a deceased poet. Instead, he celebrated the implies that his parents-or at least his mother-were
away from Rome and Latium just prior to the winter
birthday of the son of an illustrious contemporary.
Verses 1-4 of his work show that the immediate object when he was born.8 Now the circumstances of birth
of praise is a boy who has just reached, in the current which Merobaudes describes seem to fit best the year
idiom, his first birthday.2 Merobaudes does not name 440. From 435 to 439 Atius was frequently on
the boy's father, but he is undoubtedly Aetius.3 campaign in Gaul. In 439 he concluded a treaty with
Aetius had two sons. Regarding the elder, Carpilio, the Visigoths. After this a personal quarrel with a
the sources only state that he was a hostage at the senator named Albinus delayed his departure, and
court of Attila the Hun. Probably Aitius sent him he apparently did not return to Italy until late sum-
sometime after 433 to guarantee a treaty which he had mer, 440.9 The probable fact that Gaudentius was
concluded with the Huns in that year.4 The sources
Var. I 4, 11. Cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. "Carpilio" (2), RE 3 (1899):
chronology of the relevant parts of Faustus' career, cf. Sundwall,
p. 1611; Sundwall, WVestr6mische Studien (Berlin, 1915), p. 60,
Westromische Studien (Berlin, 1915), pp. 75-76, no. 167;no.Chas- 82. For the date, see esp. Altheim, Geschichte (Berlin, 1962)
tagnol, Les fastes (Paris, 1962), pp. 286-289, no. 128; and4:Jones,
p. 188, n. 10.
Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 2: p. 558, and 3: p. 160, In.Prosp.
81. 1373 [Chron. min. 1: p. 483]; Sidon. Carm. V 203-206;
6 Cf. Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1: no. 2950. Hydat. 167 [Chron. min. 2: p. 28]; Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins. 88 [ed.
7 Cf. Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 1: p. 340. de Boor 3: p. 129]. Cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. "Gaudentius" (7), RE 7,
8 Gesta Senatus 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 [Cod. Theod. 1, 2: pp. 1-4]. 1(1910): p. 859; Sundwall, WVestr6mische Studien (Berlin, 1915),
9Cod. Theod. 1, 2: p.4. p. 82, no. 198; and W. Ensslin, s.V. "Placidia" (2), RE 20, 2
10 Cf. Gesta Senatus 1 [Cod. Theod. 1, 2: p. 1]. Olajos, Antik (1950): p. 1931. Aetius may also have had a daughter. Cf.
Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): pp. 173 and 177, accepts Niebuhr's Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 214, n. 19.
reading, and dates the poem to the late 430's or early 440's. 6 Cf. Merob. Carm. IV 15-18; and Sidon. Carm. V 203-206.
1 Stat. Silv. II 7, Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 5; Teuffel, 7 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 5, ad Merob. Carm. IV 11 and
Geschichte (Berlin, 1913) 3: p. 429; and Lenz, s.v. "Merobaudes"38. Vss. 29-30 might be interpreted to mean that Gaudentius
(3), RE 15, 1 (1931): pp. 1042-1043. arrived in Rome shortly after his birth and baptism (cf. vss.
2 "Panditur" of vs. 1 implies that the second year has just 23-28). But the adjective "natalem" in vs. 38 clearly points to
arrived, rather than is completed. Cf. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, Gaudentius' birth in Rome. Thus vss. 29-30 probably refer to
1953), p. 27, n. 6; and Olajos, Antik Tanulma'nyok 13 (1966): p. Gaudentius' formal reception by Rome after his baptism.
177. 8 Merob. Carm. IV 39 indicates that the delayed birth permitted
3 Cf. Merob. Carm. IV 12; Vollmer, MHG:AA 14: p. 342, s.v. Gaudentius to see (at birth) not only Rome, but Latium.
"ductor"; and Lenz, s.v. "Merobaudes" (3), RE 15, 1 (1931): I For the campaigns of 435-439, cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959)
p. 1042. 1: pp. 322-324. The Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 123 [Chron. min.
4Prisc. Exc. de leg. Rom. 3 [ed. de Boor 1, 1: p. 128]; Cassiod.
1: p. 660] places Aetius' return to Italy in 439, but its chronology
betrothed to Placidia as of 454 furnishes tentative Merobaudes' remark suggests that Atius was forty-
confirmation for this time of birth. According to six or older in 441/2. Fortunately the poet furnishes
Roman law a boy was considered eligible for marriage more explicit evidence regarding Aetius' age. In
upon reaching the age of puberty, that is upon com- lines 41-46 he notes that when AMtius was scarcely an
pleting his fourteenth year.'0 Aetius apparently adult (42)-that is, when he was about fourteen years
arranged the betrothal of his younger son prior to 454.11 old-he was a hostage of the Visigothic chieftain
But in September, 454, the marriage had not yet taken Alaric. Since he probably began his captivity in 405,
place. One possible explanation of this lapse of time he was born about 391.16 Thus be was in his fifties
is that Gaudentius was not of age. The fact that by when Merobaudes honored his son in 441/2. The
autumn 454 Atius was eager for the wedding to occur poet could well say that he was worthy of the staff of
may mean that Gaudentius had then attained or had retirement. 17
nearly attained the legal age for marriage.12 If he In the middle of the poem Merobaudes turns his
were born in the winter of 440/1, he would have com- attention from Atius and his son to another member of
pleted his fourteenth year during the winter of 454/5.13 the family, his wife. The poet's description of this
The presumed time of Gaudentius' birth makes it woman raises a problem regarding the number of
possible to date Merobaudes' poem. Since the poet Atius' wives. According to the fifth-century his-
honors the boy's first birthday, he wrote this work in torian Frigeridus, Atius became a captive of the Huns
winter, 441/2.14 From verses 5-11 it appears that (probably between 408 and 423) and afterwards
both boy and poet were in Rome for the celebration. married the daughter of Carpilio, a Count of the
Perhaps Aetius himself was also on hand.'5 Of course Domestics.8 Aetius' elder son was born from this
Atius is the real object of the poet's praise. His marriage, and took the name of his maternal grand-
son's birthday is merely the immediate occasion of the father. His younger son Gaudentius bore the name of
poem. Merobaudes' observation that Aetius is worthy his paternal grandfather,'9 but it is uncertain whether
of the "rudis" (13) has important implications for his the boy had the same mother as his brother, Carpilio.
age at the time of the poem's composition. The rudis The name Carpilio is probably a Roman cognomen.20
was a staff which symbolized the retirement of a According to Merobaudes and Sidonius, Gaudentius'
gladiator. Merobaudes probably uses the term meta- mother descended from Gothic royalty.2' While it is
phorically to state that Aetius is at or past retirement possible that the elder Carpilio was a Goth who took a
age as of Gaudentius' first birthday. Now a Roman Roman cognomen, it is also conceivable that
soldier traditionally became a senior after completing Gaudentius' mother was not the daughter of Carpilio.
his forty-sixth year, and was then eligible to retire. Merobaudes and Sidonius seemingly show the Gothic
woman preoccupied with Gaudentius as if he were her
only son.22 Other glimpses of Aetius' wife or wives
is less important than the general information it relays. Prosp.
complicate the problem. Marcellinus implies and
1341 [Chron. min. 1: p. 478] dates to 440 Aetius' quarrel with
Albinus. Nov. Val. IX suggests that the altercation detained the John of Antioch states that in 432 Atius married
general in Gaul at least until 24 June, 440. Prosper states that Pelagia, the second wife of his deceased enemy, Count
after the death of Pope Xystus III the Catholic Church went for Boniface.23 The historian Grevorv of Tours Dictures
over forty days without a pontiff because the future Pope Leo I
was in Gaul attempting to restore friendship between Aetius and 16 On the basis of Merob. Carm. IV 42, Seeck, Geschichte
Albinus. By usual reckoning, Xystus died on 19 August, 440, (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: pp. 103 and 413, dates Aetius' birth to 391
and Leo's consecration took place on 29 September, 440. Cf. or a bit earlier. Using the same evidence, Wurm, De rebus gestis
Bardy, Histoire de l'1glise (Paris, 1937) 4: p. 259. Hence it was (Bonn, 1844), p. 9, posits 395 or 396 as Aetius' year of birth,
probably late summer before Aetius left Gaul. reasoning from a date of 409 for Aetius' internment with Alaric.
10 Cf. Corbett, Roman Law (Oxford, 1930), pp. 51-52. The year 405 is to be preferred for this event. See below, pp.
11 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 59 (1964): pp. 23-29. 56-58. Thus Seeck's chronology is more plausible.
12 Cf. Prosp. 1373 [Chron. min. 1: p. 483]. 17 In Paneg. II 148, written in 446, Merobaudes describes
13 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 5, dates Gaudentius' birth to ca. Caesar as a senior in such a context as to imply that Aetius
Julius
440. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), p. 27, n. 6, places the event in had the same status.
439, reasoning that (1) Merobaudes is celebrating the boy's first 18 Frigeridus apud Greg. Tur. HF II 8. For the chronology
birthday; (2) Aetius was in Rome when the poet composed this of Aetius' captivity among the Huns, cf. Sundwall, Westrdmische
work (see vss. 12-14); and (3) Aetius returned to Italy in 440, Studien (Berlin, 1915), no. 5, p. 40; and Demougeot, De l'unite
and the poet implies that his arrival there was recent. Lenz, (Paris, 1951), pp. 365-366.
s.v. "Merobaudes" (3), RE 15, 1 (1931): p. 1042, adopts a similar 19 Cf. Sundwall, Westromische Studien (Berlin, 1915), pp. 81-82,
line of reasoning and chronology. Both Lenz and Gitti ignore no. 196; and 0. Seeck, s.v. "Gaudentius" (6), RE 7, 1 (1910):
Merobaudes' statement (vs. 38) that Gaudentius was born p. 859.
in Rome. 20 Cf. Forcellini, Totius latinitatis onomasticon (Prati, 1868) 2:
14 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 5; and Olajos, Antik Tanul- p. 139, s.v. "Carpilio."
manyok 13 (1966): p. 177. 21 Merob. Carm. IV 15-18; Sidon. Carm. V 128, 203-206.
15 Vollmer, ibid., argues that Merob. Carm. IV 12-14 indicates 22 Merob. Carm. IV 19-24; Sidon. Carm. V 126-304, esp. 203-
Aetius' presence. But in this sentence Merobaudes uses the 206. Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 67, n. 1; and
subjunctive ("laxet," "ambiat") rather than the indicative mood. de Lepper, De rebus gestis Bonifatii (Tilburg, 1941), p. 114.
Cf. also vs. 15: "adsit." Thus the poet may simply wish that 23 Marcell. Com. s.a. 432 [Chron. min. 2: p. 78]; Joh. Ant.
Aetius (and later his wife and father-in-law) were present. Exc. de ins. 85 Eed. de Boor 3: p. 126].
Aetius' wife during Attila's invasion of Gaul (451) as a She became a Catholic upon her marriage, but ap-
devout-that is orthodox-Christian.24 parently retained her Arian leanings.29 Upon her
Since the evidence for Aetius' married life is so conversion she may have taken a typically Christian
fragmentary, it is not surprising that there are different name.30 But in view of the seeming disparity between
hypotheses regarding the number of times AMtius the princess and Pelagia, some students of this pro-
married. According to one thesis, Aetius had only one blem assert that Aetius married into the family of the
wife, the daughter of Carpilio.25 But this construction Visigothic King Theoderic I in conjunction with the
ignores the testimony of Marcellinus and John of treaty of 439.31 While it is true that in 441/2 Mero-
Antioch, and raises the difficulties discussed above baudes refers to Aetius' father-in-law as an ally,32 there
concerning the name Carpilio and the ethnic identity is no evidence for such a marriage. Indeed, Sidonius
of Gaudentius' mother. Another theory is that AMtius has Aetius' Gothic wife allege that she is "debarred
may have married three times-first Carpilio's daugh- from Gothic scepters."33 A remark of this sort would
ter, then Pelagia, and finally a Gothic princess.26 be more appropriate to a renegade Goth than to a
But this conjecture involves a multiplication of relative of Theoderic who married Aetius with the
possibilities in the face of apparent difficulties. Each king's blessing. AMtius may have wedded a Visigothic
unit of evidence shows a potentially distinct wife of woman of high birth prior to 439.34 There is one
Aetius. If one pursues the latter train of thought to indication that Pelagia herself was of noble origin:
its logical end, one arrives at an unlikely total of four Marcellinus states that she was very rich. If Pelagia
spouses: the daughter of Carpilio (Frigeridus), were a Goth, Aetius would have a double inducement
Pelagia (Marcellinus and John of Antioch), the Gothic to marry her. He would obtain her wealth and her
princess (Merobaudes and Sidonius), and an orthodox connections with the Goths.35
Christian (Gregory of Tours). It seems more likely But the most cogent reason for identifying Pelagia
that AMtius had only two wives, the daughter of with the Gothic noblewoman is the apparent religious
Carpilio and Pelagia.27 There is some evidence in inclinations of both. As noted above, Pelagia aband-
favor of this thesis. M\arcellinus says that the dying oned Arianism and became a Catholic when she
Boniface urged his wife Pelagia to marry Aetius. This married Boniface, but seemingly kept strong ties with
suggests at least that Aetius' first wife, the daughter her former faith. Presumably she maintained a
of Carpilio, was dead by 432. Indeed, the apparent similar frame of mind when she married Aetius. Now
time gap between the life of Carpilio, who appears this is precisely what one would expect of Merobaudes'
after 433, and that of Gaudentius (born 440/1) tends and Sidonius' Gothic princess.36 The Goths were
to strengthen the possibility that Aetius contracted Arians, but a Gothic wife of a high-ranking general
a second, later marriage. Furthermore, John of would probably suppress her customary religion in
Antioch states explicitly that after the death of order to enhance the status of her family in its relations
Boniface Aetius "became master of his wife and with the imperial hierarchy. Certainly by the early
property."28 450's Gaudentius' mother aspired to the imperial
Now it is uncertain whether Pelagia and the Gothic succession through her son,37 and realized that at least
princess depicted by Merobaudes and Sidonius are the Gaudentius had to be an orthodox Christian-that is,
same woman. Pelagia is a Graeco-Roman rather than a Catholic-in order to join the imperial family.
a Gothic name. But this fact does not eliminate the
possibility that she was a Goth. St. Augustine relates 29 Aug. Ep. 220, 4. Cf. Ensslin, s.v. "Pelagia" (5), RE 19, 1
that the wife of Boniface-probably Pelagia-sub- (1937): p. 223; and Meslin, Les Ariens (Paris, 1967), p. 96,
scribed to Arianism, the traditional faith of the Goths. n. 219. Note that Augustine does not state that Pelagia re-
turned to Arianism after her marriage. She did, however, have
her daughter baptized and her household rebaptized by Arian
24 Greg. Tur. HF II 7. priests.
25 Cf. Sundwall, Westromische Studien (Berlin, 1915), p.
30 42,
For Pelagia as a common Christian name, cf. J. Schmidt,
no. 5 and p. 60, no. 81; Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: s.v. "Pelagia" (4), RE 19, 1 (1937), 223. De Lepper, De rebus
p. 105 (but cf. pp. 117-118); and Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain,gestis (Tilburg, 1941), p. 115, attempts to circumvent this diffi-
1961), pp. 268, n. 1, and 291, n. 1. culty by suggesting that Marcellinus or his copiers corrupted a
26 Cf. Bugiani, Storia di Ezio (Florence, 1905), pp. 138-139. Gothic name into a more familiar Greek name.
27 Cf. Lizerand, Aetius (Paris, 1910), pp. 18, n. 2; W. Ensslin, 31 Cf. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), pp. 56-57; Hasse-
s.v. "Pelagia" (5), RE 19, 1 (1937): p. 223; Loyen, Recherches brauk, Westrom (Braunschweig, 1899), p. 26, n. 77; and Bugiani,
(Paris, 1942), p. 67; de Lepper, De rebus gestis (Tilburg, 1941), Storia (Florence, 1905), p. 139.
pp. 34-36, 113-115; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), 32 Merob. Carm. IV 15.
pp. 213-214, 235. 33 Sidon, Carm. V 204.
28 See above, n. 23. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), pp. 34 In this case, Merob. Carm. IV 15 would be a reference to
56-57, and Bugiani, Storia (Florence, 1905), p. 138, both conclude the renewal of the Romano-Visigothic treaty in 439.
from Marcellinus' testimony that Aetius' first wife was dead, 35 Cf. de Lepper, De rebus gestis (Tilburg, 1941), pp. 113-114.
but the former ignores and the latter questions John of Antioch's 36 De Lepper (p. 114) sees a similarity between the rich and
evidence. For the reliability of both sources, and the gap in formerly Arian Pelagia and the lady aristocrat of Gothic descent.
time between the lives of Carpilio and Gaudentius, cf. de Lepper, 37 See again Sidon. Carm. V 203-206, as elucidated by Oost,
De rebus gestis (Tilburg, 1941), pp. 113-115. Classical Philology 59 (1964): pp. 23-29.
Merobaudes sheds ambiguous light on this matter. As noted above, Gregory of Tours depicts Aetius'
In Gaudentius' birthday poem he describes the boy's wife of 451 as a pious, orthodox Christian.42 Since
baptism apparently by his mother in terms deliberately Gregory and Sidonius both speak of Aetius' spouse of
contrasting Thetis' attempt to make Achilles immortal the early 450's,43 there can be little doubt that they are
in the Styx (19-28). The manner in which the poet referring to the same person. But even with the
represents the baptism caused Niebuhr to suspect him present hypothesis this difficulty is only apparent.
of flirting with heretical notions.38 But later critics There is a good possibility that Gaudentius' mother
have disposed of Niebuhr's suspicions. They point was a Catholic with Arian leanings. Gregory of Tours
out that Merobaudes was a devout Christian, but also describes a Catholic woman, but probably exag-
like other poets of his faith he freely mixes pagan gerates her faith." The picture of Pelagia and the
classical imagery with matters pertaining to the Gothic princess, then, is fairly uniform. When
Church. In Carmen I, for example, he uses pagan Merobaudes wrote his poem in 441/2 celebrating the
symbolism to depict the baptism of a member of birthday of Gaudentius, AMtius had a second wife.
Valentinian's family, which was highly orthodox.
Furthermore, although he contrasts the baptism of PANEGYRIC I
Gaudentius with Achilles' submersion in the Styx, it is
In investigating most of Merobaudes' works the critic
possible that he actually conforms to the orthodox
has little difficulty in determining the nature of the
theory of baptism.89 Indeed, Merobaudes' description
composition. He can proceed immediately to analyze
seems to fit even the orthodox practice of infant bap-
the historical evidence which the poet-orator presents.
ism by immersion, which was common in the fifth
This is not the case for Panegyric I. This oration is
century.40
the most difficult to understand in terms of its ethos.
But Niebuhr and his critics have somewhat missed
Furthermore, the paucity of distinct historical infor-
the point. As a court poet Merobaudes geared his
mation makes it hard to date.
remarks to the inclinations of his immediate audience
Until the turn of this century the standard interpre-
-in this case Atius and his wife. The poet was
tation of this composition was that of Niebuhr, who
probably an orthodox Christian himself, and his
maintained that Panegyric I is the prose preface to
description of Gaudentius' baptism is possibly
Panegyric II, a poetic work celebrating the third
orthodox. If there are any lingering doubts about the
consulate of Aetius (446).1 But Vollmer showed by
description, it is likely that Merobaudes was attempt-
a careful study of the Codex sangallensis 908 that
ing to adjust his poetic expressions to the doubtful
Panegyric I is a prose oration separate from Panegyric
religious inclinations of Gaudentius' mother. Such
II. He suggested that i\lerobaudes composed Pane-
ambiguity was also a characteristic of Pelagia.4'
gyric I to honor Atius when the latter assumed his
Thus it is possible, but not certain, that around 432
second consulate in 437. This interpretation has
Aetius married Pelagia, a descendant of Gothic royalty
received general acceptance.2 But a close examina-
who had adopted Catholicism, but who retained a
tion of Merobaudes' prose panegyric will not support
partial preference for her former Arian faith. There is
Vollmer's suggestion. Indeed, there is a strong possi-
one further obstacle to this tentative reconstruction.
bility that the date and nature of this work have thus
38 Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824) pp. far been misconceived.
ix-x, especially objects to Merob. Carm. IV 26-27.
39 Cf. Peerlkamp, Bibliotheca critica nova 2 (1826): pp. 105-111, The most immediately striking fact about the
at pp. 106-108; Jeep, Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie, ser. 2, surviving fragments of Panegyric I is that they are
28 (1873): pp. 301-302; Teuffel, Geschichte (Berlin, 1913) 3: written not in poetic meter, but in prose. Merobaudes
p. 428; Raby, Secular Latin Poetry (Oxford, 1957) 1: pp. 98-99;
apparently did compose a prose preface to his second
and especially Gennaro, Da Claudiano a Merobaude (Catania,
1959), pp. 7-23, 37, 52-55, et passim. But note that Fontaine, panegyric,3 but the bulk of his extant work is verse.
Latomus 20 (1961): pp. 592-594, questions many of the parallels The poems show the influence of many Latin versifiers
Gennaro adduces to prove that Merobaudes was orthodox. from the classical past, but Merobaudes' linear prede-
Merob. Carm. IV 23-28 seems to fit the assumption of some
cessor Claudian, the court poet of the Emperor
Christian theologians that in baptism there was a metastoicheiosis
of the water into a divine material. This occurred by means of Honorius and his generalissimo Stilicho, made the
the descent of the spirit following the invocation of God. Cf.
von Harnack, History of Dogma (New York, 1958) 4: pp. 283-284,
n. 1. 42 See again Greg. Tur. HF II 7.
40 Cf. J. A. Jungman, s.v. "Baptism (Liturgy of)," New Catholic 43 For the chronology of Sidonius, see above, n. 37.
Encyclopedia 2 (1967): pp. 58-62, at pp. 58-59. Note especially 44 Meyer, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 62 (1969): p. 6, n. 9, regards
Merob. Carm. IV 23-24. There is a lacuna between vss. 22 and the wife described by Sidonius and Gregory of Tours as the same
23, but the subject of "rigavit" (24) appears to be Gaudentius' woman.
mother. At first glance this would seem to be heresy. Why 1 Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), pp. 7-12.
would a mother rather than a priest baptize an infant? The 2 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: pp. i-iv, 7-10. For the continuing
answer is simple: Merobaudes indulges in poetic license in order acceptance of Vollmer's conclusions, see, for example, Olajos,
to offer a parallel to Thetis' immersion of Achilles. Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): pp. 178-181.
41 See above, n. 29. 3 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: pp. 10-11.
greatest poetic impression.4 Since Claudian wrote Panegyric I regarding Aetius' consulate is at least
only poetry, one might expect Merobaudes to draw sufficient to call Vollmer's conclusion into question.
on a different tradition for his prose oration. Indeed A second noteworthy fact about Panegyric I is that
it appears that Merobaudes put together many Merobaudes has inserted a considerable amount of
standard elements of Latin prose, particularly of the autobiographical information into his praise of Aetius.
prose panegyric.5 There are definite echoes in Pane- In the last two fragments of this work the orator
gyric I from the works of Seneca the Younger,6 and summarizes his own career up to the time of the
one finds some corresponding expressions in the pane- delivery of the panegyric, he discusses his difficulties
gyrics of Symmachus.7 Furthermore, it seems likely as a mere rhetorician in praising Aetius, and he re-
that Merobaudes would be generally aware of other counts one of Aetius' victories in the context of his
prose eulogies such as the twelve Panegyrici latini and own travels along the Dalmatian coast.'0 While a
the Gratiarum actio of Ausonius. certain amount of personal apology is common to all
In its surviving form Merobaudes' Panegyric I con- panegyrics, it is unusual for an orator to embellish a
sists of four separate fragments. The first two stand regular panegyric-a simple laudatio-with details of
in apparently close relation to each other, for they his own career. A laudatio generally consists of
both contain uninterrupted praise of an unnamed undiluted praise of some illustrious figure. But there
general who is certainly AMtius. A similar bond are special types of the prose panegyric which regu-
characterizes the second pair of fragments. Here larly contain some particulars about the orator him-
Merobaudes mingles praise of Aetius with details of self. One such kind comprises a combination of
his own career. A close scrutiny of these four sections praise and petition directed toward a distinguished
reveals two further striking facts. In the first place, person. Another more common form is the gratiarum
none of the surviving portions of Panegyric I carries actio, a panegyric in which the orator gives praise
mention of AMtius' consulate. This observation may and thanks to an eminent man for something the latter
not at first seem important. The lost parts of Pane- has done for him. Since Merobaudes probably drew
gyric I may have contained many references to Aetius on past performances for his prose oration, it is reason-
as consul. It is worth noting, however, that the able to suppose that he adopted the tradition of the
similarly fragmentary Panegyric II furnishes several special prose panegyric as the model for his work.
indications that Aetius' consulship is the occasion of Furthermore, one might expect him to select the more
that work.9 In this context the apparent silence of common variety of the special panegyric, the gratiarum
actio. In fact, a comparison of the surviving grati-
arum actiones with Merobaudes' Panegyric I will
4See the numerous verbal echoes from Claudian in Vollmer, show that the latter work has many of the earmarks
MGH:AA 14: pp. 3-6, 12-13, and 16-20.
of the special oration of thanksgiving."
6 Cf. Lenz, s.v. "Merobaudes" (3), RE 15, 1 (1931): p. 1044.
For the tradition of the panegyric available to Merobaudes, cf.
There are four gratiarum actiones which have
K. Ziegler, s.v. "Panegyrikos," RE 18, 2 (1949): pp. 559-581, at survived in their entirety from antiquity: Pliny's
pp. 579-580. Panegyric to Trajan, and three panegyrics of thanks-
6 Compare Merob. Paneg. I frg. IA 8-9 with Seneca frg. 14 giving to Constantine, Julian and Gratian, delivered
(Haase): "Quid tibi prodest non habere conscium habenti con-
respectively by an anonymous orator, Claudius
scientiam ?" Cf. Burger, Minucius Felix (Munich, 1904), pp.
30-31. Compare also Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 13-15, 19-20 with Mamertinus, and Ausonius."2 Other gratiarum ac-
Seneca De clementia I 1, 1: "Quamvis enim recte factorum verus tiones, such as that of Symmachus to Theodosius I,
fructus sit fecisse, nec ulhlim virtutum pretium dignum illis extra remain only in fragments.'3 Despite countless struc-
ipsas sit . . . "; and De clem. I 1, 6: "Nemo quod te imitari velit
tural variations among these orations, it is possible to
exemplar, extra te quaerit." Cf. Bickel, Rheinisches Museum
fur Philologie, ser. 2, 60 (1905): p. 317. 10 Cf. Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 1-7, 15-18; frg. IIB 7-24.
7Compare Merob. Paneg. I frg. IA 15-20 with Symmachus 11 The difference between the regular and the special panegyric
Laudatio in Valentinianum Seniorem Augustum I 2 [MGH:AA 6, is most readily discernible in the twelve Panegyrici latini. Eight
1: pp. 318-319]: "Tibi ardores Gaetuliae aestivam consuetu- may be classified as pure laudationes. Three- the orations of
dinem, tibi Illyriae pruinae brumalis horroris tolerantiam tradi-
Pliny, Claudius Mamertinus and an anonymous Gallic rheto-
derunt, genitus in frigoribus, educatus in solibus, ante fortunae
rician-are gratiarum actiones. The oration of Eumenes on
munera totius mundi exempla sumpsisti": and 1 14 [ibid., p. behalf of the restoration of the schools at Autun is the only
321]: "Et regalis aula sub pellibus, somnus sub caelo, potus surviving example of the praise-and-petition oration. Cf. Gal-
e fluvio, tribunal in campo." Compare also Merob. Paneg. latier, Pane'gyriques latins (Paris, 1949) 1: pp. vii-viii; and
I frg. IIA 12-13 with Symmachus Laudatio II 27 [MGH:AA 6, Burdeau, Aspects de l'Empire romain (Paris, 1964), p. 2. For the
1: p. 329]: "Ut video, aeterne defensor, conscientia tua maior origin and development of the gratiarum actio, cf. Paladini,
est consulatu. Habes, quod tibi aliter praestare non possit, Historia 10 (1961): pp. 356-374. I am grateful to Professor F.
ainimum praemio celsiorem." Solmsen for his suggestions regarding this point.
8 See the general list of Merobaudes' predecessors in Ziegler, 12 The latest edition of Pliny's Panegyric and the gratiarum
s.v. "Panegyrikos," RE 18, 2 (1949): pp. 579-580. actiones to Constantine and Julian is that of Sir R. A. B. Mynors,
1 Cf. Merob. Paneg. 11 13, 30-38, 43-46. For Aetius as the XII panegyrici latini (Oxford, 1964), pp. 1-81, 121-144, and
object of praise in both these orations, compare Merob. Paneg. 174-185. K. Schenkl's edition of Ausonius' gratiarum actio
I frg. IIB 3-4 and Paneg. II 106-107. See also Vollmer, [MGH:AA 5, 2: pp. viii, 19-30] is still standard.
MGH:AA 14: p. 295, s.v. "Aitius." 13 Cf. Seeck MGH:AA 6, 1: pp. vi, 340.
34 CLOVER: FLAVIUS MEROBAUDES [TRANS. AMER. PHIL. SOC,
distinguish four major elements of the gratiarum ceived this exalted position is a possible indication
actio: (1) the exordium, or introduction; (2) the that the high rank itself was the immediate impetus
gratiarum actio publica, or general praise and thanks for his panegyric. In other words, Merobaudes may
to an illustrious person for his good acts; (3) the have taken the opportunity of his recent honor to
gratiarum actio privata, or private thanks to the same render thanks to the man chiefly responsible for it-
person for something he has done on the orator's AMtius.2l Once Merobaudes makes this key point, he
behalf (this is usually the immediate impetus for the again launches into extensive praise of AMtius. But
presentation of the entire oration); and (4) the this time he lets his own person show through more
peroratio, or conclusion.'4 than in the earlier two fragments of his work.22 All
Now the extant parts of Merobaudes' Panegyric I of this rhetorical behavior is characteristic of the
seem to fit the general framework of the gratiarum gratiarum actio, particularly the section containing
actio. In the first two fragments Merobaudes praises private thanksgiving.
without interruption the merits, virtues, and deeds of Mlerobaudes' Panegyric I shows at least one other
Aetius.l5 Such continuous adulation is characteristic affinity with the gratiarum actio. It is common in a
of all gratiarum actiones, especially those of late panegyric of thanksgiving for an orator to use directly
antiquity.'6 Furthermore, it has already been noted the idiom gratias agere-"to render thanks."23 In
that in the last two fragments Merobaudes mixes the surviving fragments of Panegyric I this expression
praise of Aetius with details about his own career.'7 does not occur, but Merobaudes does use the idiom
This is one of the features of the gratiarum actio praemium debere or referre-"to owe or present a
privata. In this section of his work an orator regularly reward."24 The latter phrase is similar to the former,
recounts the highlights of his past career, ending with and in both cases the indirect object is the addressee
the most recent honor, which inspires his present of the entire oration.
thanks. Usually the panegyrist relates his own life's Now if one grants for the moment that Merobaudes'
work so tactfully as to make it serve as a foil to the prose oration may be a gratiarum actio, a major prob-
greater merits and deeds of the distinguished person lem arises. The general purpose of this type of
whom he is addressing.18 Merobaudes does precisely panegyric is to give thanks to the emperor for receiving
this. He narrates his past distinctions-admission some form of the consulate from him.5 In his Pane-
to the Roman Senate, erection of a statue in his gyric I Merobaudes does not address Emperor Valen-
honor-and ends with his most recent reward, a "title tinian III, but his general Aetius. Furthermore,
of the greatest esteem."'9 He is careful to point out Merobaudes' name does not appear on the consular
that although Emperor Theodosius II conferred this fasti. But these aspects of Merobaudes' life and work
title on him, he earned it by faithfully praising AMtius.20 constitute only an apparent difficulty for the present
Now Merobaudes' assertion that he "recently" re- hypothesis. In the first place, the end of the fourth
and beginning of the fifth centuries saw a shift in the
14 See the general remarks of Paladini, Historia 10 (1961): nature of the official panegyric. Whereas previously
pp. 356-374. For Pliny's Panegyric, see also Durry, Pane- the panegyric's general object of praise had been the
gyrique de Trajan (Paris, 1938), pp. 5-15; Malcovati, II pane- emperor, now the addressee was frequently a high
girico di Traiano (Florence, 1952), pp. 1-5, 15, 163, 168-169; official in the imperial administration. One thinks
d'Ors, Panegirico de Trajano (Madrid, 1955), pp. xv-xx, li-liii;
primarily of Claudian's panegyrics to Stilicho in
G. Bellardi, II panegirico di Traiano (Bologna, 1964), pp. xix-
xxii; Sherwin-White, The Letters of Pliny (Oxford, 1966), pp. this connection.26 Since Merobaudes inherited much
250-253, ad Plin. Ep. III 18; and Radice, Pliny: Letters and of Claudian's style and emphasis, it is not surprising
Panegyricus (Cambridge, Mass., 1969) 1: pp. xxii-xxv. For that he chose to praise Aetius rather than Valentinian.
Pan. lat. V (VIII) to Constantine, cf. Gallatier, Panegyriques
The second difficulty with the current thesis-
latins (Paris, 1952) 2: pp. 87-88. Pan. lat. III (XI), or Mamer-
tinus' Gratiarum actio: Gutzwiller, Die Neujahrsrede (Freiburg,
Merobaudes' absence from the consular fasti-is also
1942), pp. 81-91; and Barabino, Claudio Mamertino (Genoa, only apparent. By late antiquity the gratiarum actio
1965), p. 37. The structure of Ausonius' Gratiarum actio may be had deteriorated from its originally intended form.27
analyzed as follows: (1) exordium-chap. 1; (2) gratiarum actio
privata-chaps. 2-12; (3) gratiarum actio publica-chaps. 13-17; 21 Cf. ibid. frg. IIA 3.
and (4) peroratio-chap. 18. 22 Ibid. frg. IIA 10-23, frg. IIB passim.
15 Merob. Paneg. I frgg. IA and B. For Merobaudes' use of 23 Plin. Pan. 90, 4; Pan. lat. III (XI) 1, 1; Auson. Grat. act. 1,
literary topoi at this point, see Born, Amer. Jour. Philology 55 1; 2, 6.
(1934): pp. 20-35, at 24. 24 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 7-12.
16 Cf. Paladini, Historia 10 (1961): pp. 369-370. 26 The immediate occasion of Pliny's Panegyric was his assump-
17 Merob. Paneg. I frgg. IIA and B. tion of the office of consul suffectus on 1 September, 100. Mamer-
18 Cf. Plin. Pan. 90-95; Pan. lat. III(XI) 15-22; and Auson. tinus, Ausonius, and Symmachus delivered their gratiarum
Grat. act. 2-12. Eumenes inserts some information about his actiones during their consulates in 362, 379, and 391 respectively.
See above, nn. 12-14, and Degrassi, Ifasti consolari (Rome, 1952),
own career into his praise-and-petition oration, but such informa-
tion is more muted than that of Merobaudes' Panegyric I and the pp. 30, 82, 84-85.
gratiarum actiones. Cf. Pan. lat. IX (V) 5-6. 26 See the convenient summary of Ziegler, s.v. "Panegyrikos,"
19 Merob. Paneg. I frg. 11A 1-5. RE 18, 2 (1949): pp. 579-580.
20 Ibid. frg. IIA 5-10. 27 Cf. Paladini, Historia 10 (1961): pp. 369-370.
The anonymous panegyric of thanksgiving to Constan- not give adequate proof of his assertion, there is much
tine, for instance, merely contains praise of that to be said for it. In the first place, the descriptions
emperor for his good deeds toward the city of Autun. of the patriciate in late antiquity are laudatory enough
Its only connection with the consulate lies in the fact to match Merobaudes' glowing portrayal of the dis-
that Constantine was consul during the year in which tinction he received.35 Secondly, Merobaudes was a
the oration was delivered.28 At best, then, the diffi- high-ranking senator by the middle and late 430's,
culties raised here cause a slight modification of the and it was unusual, but not imnpossible, for a man of
present hypothesis: Merobaudes' Panegyric I is an his position to attain the high honor of the patriciate.
oration delivered in the tradition of the gratiarum Usually a distinguished Roman in Merobaudes' time
actio. achieved the patriciate, which was juridically only a
But in order to sharpen the understanding of Pane- title, in conjunction with a high magistracy.36
gyric I, one must determine just what recent honor A third factor in favor of Vollmer's interpretation
caused Merobaudes to render thanks to Aetius. The is the direct testimony of Nicolas Camuzat, an eccle-
orator offers little help here, for he merely calls his siastical writer of the late sixteenth and early seven-
distinction a "title of the greatest esteem."29 Curi- teenth centuries. Camuzat cites a badly transmitted
ously enough, some of the possible explanations of this hagiographical composition which asserts that St.
veiled reference center around various honorary forms Romanus, sometime Bishop of Reims, obtained from
of the ordinary consulate. Vollmer suggests but dis- King Clovis I the confirmation of a prior donation of
misses the possibility that Mlerobaudes alludes to the property to the monastery of Mantaniacum (Man-
tenay-sur-Seine) by a certain "Merobaudus patri-
rank of consul suffectus.30 Ensslin argues that the
orator may have received the title of consul honora- cius."37 Camuzat admits his ignorance of the identity
rius.3' If either of these possibilities were adopted, of this Merobaudes, but Lot has examined this pas-
the hypothesis that Merobaudes' Panegyric I is an sage, and suggested that Camuzat's Merobaudes is
attenuated gratiarum actio would receive strong con- indeed the panegyrist of Aitius.38 There are of course
firmation. Merobaudes would have used a distinc- difficulties with Lot's interpretation. Merobaudes is
tion close to the consulate itself as an occasion for a common Frankish name, and Camuzat, does not
rendering thanks to Aetius, the emperor's most im- indicate the precise time span between the patrician
portant military commander. Merobaudes' donation and Clovis' confirmation.
Unfortunately, neither of these possibilities will Thus Camuzat may be referring to some other
bear scrutiny. Vollmer's rejection of the suffect Merobaudes of late Roman or early Merovingian
consulate is well considered. That distinction was times.39 But an examination of the known careers
both rare and unimportant in late antiquity.32 In of other men named Merobaudes in late antiquity
addition, there is no evidence that Merobaudes ever shows that there is only one other Romanized Frank
received such a title. One may raise a similar objec- of that name who attained a position high enough to
tion to Ensslin's suggestion. One finds no direct be considered as a possibility for the patriciate. This
testimony to support it, and indeed Ensslin admits it was the Frankish officer who flourished during the
is only a possibility. Furthermore, his theory stems
Cf. Bury, History (London, 1923) 1: p. 251; and Stein, Histoire
partly from a misrepresentation of Merobaudes. (Paris, 1959) 1: p. 330.
Ensslin maintains that Merobaudes should be referring 35 See, for example, Cod. Theod. VI 6, 1: "patriciatus splendor";
to an honorary form of the consulate, for that office Cassiod. Var. VI 2, 4: "patriciatus culmen"; Cod. Just. XII 3,
alone fits the orator's reference to the "greatest 3: "ad sublimem patriciatus honorem"; Cod. Just. X 32, 67, 1:
"summum patriciatus honorem."
honor."33 But this point is not decisive. It is almost
36 For Merobaudes' high position as of the middle (and by
certain that Merobaudes would have indulged in implication later) 430's, cf. CIL 6: no. 1724. For the patriciate
rhetorical hyperbole no matter what high distinction in Merobaudes' time, cf. Picotti, Archivio storico italiano, ser. 7,
he received. 9 (1928): pp. 3-80; Ensslin, Klio 24 (1931): pp. 496-502; Stein,
Histoire (Paris, 1949) 2: p. 117, n. 2, at pp. 117-118; Jones,
A more widely accepted interpretation of Mero-
Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 1: pp. 176, 343-344; 2:
baudes' "title of the greatest esteem" is that of pp. 528, 534; and Heil, Der konstantinische Patriziat (Basel-
Vollmer, who maintains that the orator refers to the Stuttgart, 1966), passim. See below, p. 37, for Merobaudes'
honorary rank of patricius.34 Although Vollmer does tenure of a high magistracy.
37 Camuzat, Promptuarium (Augusta Trecarum, 1610), p.
358B: "Memorata autem illa historia curta et mutila pariter
28 Cf. Gallatier, Pane'gyriques latins (Paris, 1952) 2: pp. 77-78.
testatur praefatum S. Romanum a rege Clodoueo seniore con-
29 Merob. Paneg. I frg. 11A 3-5. firmationem donationis quorumdam praediorum impetrasse, quae
30 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 9, ad Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 3.
Merobaudus patricius eidem coenobio liberalissime impertiverat."
31 Ensslin, Klio 24 (1931): pp. 483-486. 38 Ibid.: "Quinam autem fuerit ille Merobaudus, mihi plane
3 Cf. Chastagnol, Revue historique 219 (1958): pp. 221-253, at est incompertum." Cf. Lot, Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire
pp. 221-237; and Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 2: 17 (1938): pp. 906-911.
p. 532. 39 Note the indefinite past time of "impertiverat" (see above,
$ See above, n. 31. n. 37). For the name Merobaudes, see Schonfeld, Worterbuch
34Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 9, ad Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 3. (Heidelberg, 1911), s.v. "Merobaudes," p. 167.
reigns of Valentinian I and Gratian, and who attained connote anything from the relatively remote past to
the consulate in 377 and 383. But the lack of evidence the immediate present.46 Now it is possible to posit
that this Merobaudes became a patrician, plus the the year 435 as an approximate terminus post quem
general fact that the patriciate was less common in for this distinction. By that year Merobaudes pos-
the fourth than in the fifth century, tends to exclude sessed the senatorial rank of vir spectabilis, and was
this Merobaudes from consideration.40 A non-Ro- Count of the Consistory. A bronze statue of him
manized Frank from early Merovingian times is even stood in the Forum of Trajan.47 In short, the orator
less thinkable. Clovis was the first Frankish king to was on the threshold of the high point of his career.
receive the patriciate-the Emperor Anastasius I Now it has already been shown that only men of
awarded him the title in 508 and it is unlikely that high positioin received the title of patrician.48 But
any Merovingian Frank held the distinction before without further evidence it is not proper to adopt
him.4' Now the panegyrist Merobaudes flourished either Vollmer's or Niebuhr's suggestions that Mero-
in the 430's and 440's, when grants of the patriciate baudes delivered the oration in 437 or 446, the dates
were quite common in the West. The primary reason of Aetius' second and third consulates. Once again
for this was probably Valentinian III's desire to under- there is no indication in the extant fragments of
mine the prestige of Aetius, who held the title him- Panegyric I that Mlerobaudes used one of AMtius'
self.42 Under these circumstances Valentinian would consulships as the occasion for his oration.49
have been pleased to see Theodosius II make the One significanit fact about Merobaudes' honor is
poet-orator Merobaudes a patrician. Finally Camu- that instead of the Western Emperor Valentinian III,
zat's Merobaudes, who "most liberally imparted" it was the Eastern Emperor Theodosius II who con-
property to the monastery of Mantaniacum, was ferred it. This in itself is not extraordinary. Before
obviously a devout Christian. The extant works of and after he put \/aleintiiniani oll the throne of the
the poet-orator Merobaudes show that he was an West, Theodosius maintained an interest in that part
enthusiastic devotee of the Christian faith.43 Thus of the Empire. Furthermore, he was an enthusiastic
Camuzat's late testimony, which is based on earlier patron of men of letters. Thus he may have awarded
evidence, makes it likely, but not certain, that the M1erobaudes the patriciate merely on the recommenda-
panegyrist Merobaudes did attain the title of tion of Aitius.50 But this is only a possibility. It
patricius.44 is equally conceivable that Merobaudes performed
One further problem remains before one can deter- some specific service for Theodosius. Elsewhere in
mine more definitely the date and nature of Mero- Panegyric I the orator recounts a trip he made to the
baudes' Panegyric I: When did Merobaudes receive East-at least as far as Salona on the Dalmatian
the presumed title of patricius? The orator himself coast, and perhaps as far as Thrace. Thus Merobau-
offers only a vague frame of reference. He states des traveled to the East at least once in his life.5"
that he "recently" acquired his honor.45 Thus, ac- In this framework it is feasible that he accompanied
cording to the normal meaning of this adverb, he Valentinian to the East in 437, and composed a poem
received his title immediately before he delivered his or panegyric celebrating Valentinian's marriage to
oration. But this interpretation is not compelling. Theodosius' daughter Eudoxia.52 At least two dis-
The adverb has other less common meanings which
40 Cf. WV. Ensslin, s.v. "Merobaudes" (1), RE 15, 1 (1931): 46 Cf. Forcellini, s.v. "nuper," Totius latinitatis lexicon (Prati,
pp. 1038-1039. One can also dismiss another Merobaudes, who 1868) 4: pp. 322-323.
was dux Aegypti in 384, but about whom nothing else is known. 47 CIL 6: no. 1724. Cf. Merob. Paneg. I frg. 11A 2-3.
Cf. Ensslin, s.v. "Merobaudes" (2), ibid., p. 1039. On the status 48 See above, P. 35.
of the patriciate in the fourth as opposed to the fifth century, see 49 See above, p. 33.
Picotti, Archivio storico italiano, ser. 7, 9 (1928): pp. 24-25, 50 Note again that Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 5-10 ultimately
34-35; Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 3: p. 155, credits Aetius for the receipt of the honor. For Theodosius'
n. 28; and Heil, Der konstantinische Patriziat (Basel, 1966), pp. interest in affairs of the West and his patroniage of men of letters,
11-49, et passim. cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: 259, 321 and 325; Quasten,
41 For Clovis' title, cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1949) 2: p. 150, Patrology (Westminster, 1960) 3: pp. 126-127, 131, 535; Lesky,
n. 3; and Heil, Der konstantinische Patriziat (Basel, 1966), p. 186. Greek Literature (New York, 1966), p. 852; and Kaegi, Byzan-
For the status of the patriciate in Merovingian Gaul, cf. Dill, tium (Princeton, 1968), pp. 15-29. Professor Kaegi has also
Roman Society (London, 1926), pp. 82, 104-105, 112, 221; and assisted me with some specific observations on this point.
Heil, Patriziat, pp. 83, 96-101, 104-112. I am indebted to al Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 22-23, frg. IIB 7-10. See below,
Professors S. I. Oost and F. Solmsen for their suggestions re- pp. 40-41.
garding this point. 52 For Valentinian's wedding, see above, pp. 21-22. Bury,
42 Cf. Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 349, n. 2, at History (London, 1923) 1: p. 251, suggests that Merobaudes com-
pp. 349-350; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 258. posed a poem for the marriage. It seems unlikely that the poet
43 See above, n. 37. For Merobaudes as a devout Christian, actually delivered such a work in Constantinople. Merobaudes
cf. Gennaro, Da Claudiano a Merobaude (Catania, 1959), passim. of course wrote in Latin, and knowledge of it in the Greek East
44 Cf. Lot, Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire 17 (1938): was slight by the fifth century. Cf. Jones, Later Roman Empire
p. 909; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmacnyok 13 (1966): pp. 173, n. 7, (Oxford, 1964) 2: pp. 988-991. Professor S. I. Oost brought the
and 180, n. 37. possibility currently under discussion to my attention, and I
46 Merob. Paneg. I frg. I IA 3. have developed it largely along the lines of his observations.
tinguished senators, Rufius Antonius Agrypnius distinctly possible that 1\'erobaudes attained the title
Volusianus and Anicius Acilius Glabrio Faustus, of patrician in conjunction with his brief tenure of the
played a role in the wedding. Volusianus went to generalship in Spain. In the fifth century the patri-
Constantinople in 436 to make preliminary arrange- ciate rarely accrued to anyone but the chief magister
ments for the ceremony. Faustus attended Valen- utriusque militiae praesentalis, but when someone else
tinian on his journey. Presumably other prominent received it, he usually held a high-ranking position
Romans formed a part of the emperor's suite. MVero- such as that of subordinate magister utriusque
baudes, who was apparently a friend of Faustus, may militiae. 58
have been one of them.53 Theodosius might then have There is tenuous confirmation of this hypothesis
awarded Merobaudes the patriciate, citing not only from Merobaudes' Panegyric I. In an unfortunately
his most recent composition, but his works in honor incomplete sentence of this work, AiIerobaudes speaks
of Aetius; there are indications that the Eastern about those who go to Thrace, those who (do some-
Emperor was favorably disposed to Atius at this thing) within the Spains under AMtius' advice, and a
time.54 In the following year, when Atius apparently triumph.59 Vollmer advances the standard interpre-
attended the West's inaugural ceremonies for the tation of this fragmentary passage60: Merobaudes
Theodosian Code at Rome,55 Merobaudes could have refers to the liberation of Narbo from a Visigothic
delivered his panegyric of thanksgiving to the man siege in 437. But this explanation relies more on
chiefly responsible for his recent honor-Atius. what does not survive of the passage than what does.
But while the essence of this latter possibility- The sentence as it stands merely speaks of Thrace
Merobaudes' literary service to Theodosius-has and the Spains. Vollmer may give the key to the
considerable merit, there are difficulties with positing understanding of this passage when he observes its
the year 438 for the date of the oration. In arguing close connection with the following fragment of
against Vollmer's assessment of Panegyric I, Ensslin Panegyric I. There Merobaudes recounts some of
rightly points out that there is a great gap between AMtius' deeds in the context of his own travels along
the rank of vir spectabilis and the office of Count of the Dalmatian coast.6' In this framework the orator's
the Consistory, which Merobaudes attained by 435, reference to Thrace and Spain may be partially auto-
and the rank of patrician, which the orator supposedly biographical. Certainly the entire fragment contain-
received by 437. It is unreasonable to expect a man ing this passage has many of the panegyrist's reminis-
of \AIerobaudes' stature to have bridged this gap in a cences about himself. Thus Merobaudes may have
bare two years.56 One may urge a similar objection some personal acquaintance with these two areas. Of
to the date of 438 for Panegyric I. It is more reason- course Merobaudes was a former resident of Spain,
able to search for a later date, when 1\lerobaudes
attained a very high magistracy. military rank the soldier-orator held, but he implies that it was
The chronicler Hydatius gives the only evidence the same as that of his father-in-law Asturius: magister utriusque
militiae. The fact that Vitus, the third man to be sent to Spain
for the peak of Merobaudes' official career. Hydatius with a high command in the 440's, held the same rank reinforces
notes that for a short time in 443 Merobaudes fought this implication. Cf. Hydat. 134 [ibid.]. One stanidard inter-
the Bacaudae-probably as magister utriusque mili- pretation of Hydatius' testimony is that Merobaudes was indeed
tiae-in Spain. He was regional commander under magister utriusque militiae praesentalis, but subordinate to Aetius.
Cf. Bury, History (London, 1923) 1: pp. 251-252; and Stein,
Aetius, who was then chief magister utriusque
Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 330, 332. Another theory is that
militiae praesentalis, or generalissimo, in the West. he was subordinate to Aetius as mnagister utriusque militiae (per
Soon, however, his jealous opponents caused Valen- Gallias). Cf. Sundwall, Westrdnmische Studien (Berlin, 1915), no.
tinian to issue a rescript recalling him.57 Now it is 314, p. 106; and Ensslin, Klio 24 (1931): pp. 483-484. I have
adopted the new and well-documeinted solution of Jones, Later
63Volusianus: Vit. Mel. (graec.) 50 = Vit. Mel. (lat.) 11 19; cf. Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 1: p. 192, and 3: p. 36, n. 44.
Chastagnol, Revue des etudes anciennes 58 (1956): p. 253. 68 Cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1949) 2: p. 117, n. 2, at 117-118;
Faustus: Cod. Theod., Gesta Senatus romani de Theodosiano and Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 1: pp. 176, 343-
publicando a. 438 2 Eed. Mommsen 1, 2: p. 1]. For Merobaudes' 344 and 3: p. 155, n. 28. In this chronological context Mero-
presumed friendship with Faustus, see above, pp. 28-29. baudes' mention of his faith in praising Aetius when the latter
64 The consuls for the year 437 were both Westerners: Atius was both present and absent may be a reference to the works he
(for the second time) and Sigisvult. Cf. Degrassi, Fasti consolari wrote while Aetius was in Gaul (435-439) and after the general
(Rome, 1952), p. 90. Presumably Theodosius gave his consent returned to Italy in 440 (e.g., Carmen IV). Cf. Merob. Paneg.
to this. Socrat. HE VII 44 (PG 67: p. 833) states that on his I frg. IIA 5-7. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 20, interprets this
arrival in the East Valentinian had "made the Western regions passage as an allusion to Aitius' struggle with Count Boniface
safe." This may show at least a general Eastern tradition and his son-in-law Sebastian in 432.
favorable to Valentinian-and by implication his general Aetius 69 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 22-23.
60 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 9, ad Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 23,
-in 437. Cf. Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp. 243-244.
66 Cf. Cod. Theod., Gesta Senatus 5 Led. Mommsen 1, 2: p.
makes the3]:
following tentative restoration: ("Galliasque partus
"Aeti, aveas . . . Ter consulem te." est, comperimus.") This has been accepted by Sirago, Galla
56 Cf. Ensslin, Klio 24 (1931): pp. 483-486. Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 344, n. 1; and Olajos, Antik Tanul-
67 Hydat. 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]. See above, pp. 9-10. manyok 13 (1966): p. 180, n. 40.
The exact nature of Merobaudes' command has long been a 61 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 9, ad Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 23.
subject of debate. Hydatius does not state directly what See below, pp. 40-41.
but here he alludes to someone's presence in that area most interesting depiction of Aetius' personality is not
under Aetius' advice. This tallies well with the the work of one man, but of the Senate. Sometime
orator's campaign of 443 as regional commander between ca. 440 and 446 the Senate erected a statue
subordinate to Aitius.62 of a general who is probably Aetius in the Atrium of
It would appear, then, that Merobaudes composed Liberty at Rome. The inscription at the base of this
and delivered a panegyric in the tradition of the statue has recently been discovered near the Curia,
graticarum actio shortly after 443 and-in view of his and it is a laudatory portrayal of Aetius as a soldier
apparent silence regarding Aetius' consulate-before and statesman.70
446. It seems most likely that the orator presented It is not surprising that these character sketches
use corresponding expressions: They all speak of the
his panegyric in the Senate at Rome. The fact that
same man. But in some cases the phrases and clauses
Merobaudes' opponents engineered his recall in 443
are parallel. Jordanes and the inscription mention
should present no difficulties for this hypothesis. The
Aetius' dedication to the state in similar terms.7
influence of his mentor Aetius could have restored the
orator quickly to favor. Indeed, Aetius may have Jordanes touches briefly on the general's tolerance for
induced Theodosius II to remember the orator's the rigors of war, while Merobaudes discusses this
theme extensively.72 In the case of Frigeridus, there
past services and grant him the patriciate.63 Thus
is a general resemblance between his catalog of virtues
this prose panegyric seemingly belongs to the early or
middle 440's, when Merobaudes wrote his other and that of the inscription.73 Furthermore, Frigeri-
secular works which have survived.64 On the basisdus' characterization shows an affinity of expression
with Merobaudes' portrait in Panegyric I.74 Fri-
of this tentative understanding of the oration, one
can analyze more fully its content. geridus speaks of Aetius' virtues in terms generally
Some of the most important information to be resembling those of Merobaudes75; in particular, his
description of the general's ability to endure the harsh
gleaned from Panegyric I is more philological than
existence of a soldier exhibits some similarity to
historical in nature. It has already been noted that
Merobaudes' depiction of the same trait.76 The re-
M'lerobaudes drew on past prose compositions for his
own panegyricA65 But late antiquity seems to havesemblance suggests that Frigeridus may have used
the orator's work as one of his sources for his repre-
afforded the orator not only general but particular
sentation of Aetius.77
inspiration. Literary figures of this period occa-
sionally fashioned praise-filled character sketchesButof a comparison of the inscription and Mero-
individuals or collective entities.66 One of the more baudes' two panegyrics to AMtius-all contemporary
common subjects of such portraits is Aetius. The with one another-reveals the most interesting paral-
first two fragments of Merobaudes' Panegyric I are lelisms. The content and expression of Panegyric I
an extensive delineation of the general's character,
70 Cf. Bartoli, Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia romana di
and a similar representation occurs at least once in Archeologia 22 (1946-1947): pp. 267-273; Degrassi, Bullettino
Panegyric II.67 Another such picture appears in the della Commissione archeologica comunale di Roma 72 (1946-1948):
fragments of Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus, a his- pp. 33-44; and L'Anne'e epigraphique 1950: no. 30. I have
torian of the latter half of the fifth century who adopted Degrassi's convincing analysis of the date of the in-
scription. See also Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), pp.
apparently wrote a history of his own times in the 367-368; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 258.
style of Ammianus Marcellinus.68 Jordanes, a 71 L'Annee epigraphique 1950: no. 30: "semper reipublicae I
Gothic historian of the sixth century, provides still [i]npenso;" Jord. Get. 176: "rei publicae Romanae singulariter
another characterization of Aetius.69 But perhaps the natus."
72 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IA 15-20; Jord. Get. 176: "labores
62 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 23. For Merobaudes' residence in bellicos tolerans."
Spain, see above, p. 8. For his travels in the East, see below, 73 Cf. Degrassi, Bullettino della Comissione archeologica comu-
pp.40-41. nale di Roma 72 (1946-1948): pp. 35-36.
63 See above, pp. 36-37. Once again Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 74 Cf. Hansen, De vita Aetii (Dorpat, 1840), part 2: pp. 56-57;
Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), pp. 12-13; and Lizerand,
2-10 clearly states that it was his praise of Aetius which caused
Theodosius to award him the patriciate. Aetius (Paris, 1910), p. 19, n. 2.
64 See the summary above, pp. 9-10. 75 Compare Merob. Paneg. I frg. IA 21-24 and Greg. Tur. HF
65 See above, pp. 32-33. II 8 (Frigeridus): "animo alacer, membris vegitus"; Merob.
66 See, for example, Symmachus Laudatio in Valentinianum Paneg. I frg. IB 2-9 and Greg. Tur. HF II 8: "bellis aptissimus";
SenioremAugustum I 2 and 14 [MGH:AA 6, 1: pp. 318-319, 321]: Merob. Paneg. I frg. IB 9-13 and Greg. Tur. HF II 8: "pacis
artibus celebris, nullius avaritiae, minimae cupiditatis, bonis
Valentinian I; Isid. Hist. Goth. 64: the Visigothic King Swinthila;
ibid. 67: the Goths in general; and Jord. Get. 168: the Vandal animi praeditus, ne inpulsoribus quidem pravis ab instituto suo
King Geiseric, who receives grudging praise. devians."
67 Merob. Paneg. I frgg. IA and B passim; Paneg. II 98-104. 76 Compare Merob. Paneg. I frg. IA 15-20 and Greg. Tur. HF
68 Greg. Tur. HF II 8. Cf. Teuffel, Geschichte (Berlin, 1913) II3: 8: "iniuriarum patientissimus, laboris adpetens, inpavidus
p. 454; R. Buchner (ed.), Gregorii episcopi turonensis Historiarumpericulorum, famis, sitis, vigiliarum tolerantissimus."
libri decem, Ausgewahlte Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des 77 Cf. Lizerand, Aetius (Paris, 1910), p. 19, n. 2; and Oost,
Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 213, n. 11. If this is correct,
Mittelalters 1 and 3 (2 v., Berlin, 1956) 1: p. xxviii; and Sirago,
Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), pp. 20-21. Frigeridus may be used to confirm some of the doubtful readings
69 Jord. Get. 176. in frg. IA.
VOL. 61, PT. 1,19711 COMMENTARY 39
and the inscription are roughly the same, and there tween Aetius and a portion of the senatorial aristoc-
is a general correspondence in their delineations of racy of the West.83
Aetius' non-military virtues.78 More significantly, a In addition to presenting an insight into the rhetori-
murky expression in Panegyric II closely echoes an cal behavior of his contemporaries in the Senate,
obscure phrase on the Senate's monument. The Merobaudes offers a certain amount of historical
dedication speaks of Aetius' recovery of Gaul "on information in his prose panegyric, notably about
account of victories sworn in war and peace."79 himself. He mentions his recent official title-ap-
Merobaudes notes a recent fulfillment of Aetius' parently the patriciate-84 but also refers to his earlier
prayer through his defeat of the Visigoths in war-the career. One of its initial stages was his co-optation
very people whom he had subdued by peace as a into the Senate. In keeping with general practice
boy. 80 Surely Merobaudes and the inscription allude the orator at first presumably received the lowest
to the same act of Atius. The latter notes Aetius' rank of the senatorial order, that of vir clarissimus.85
pledge of victory in Gaul, and the Visigoths were one His admission to the Senate can be placed sometime
of his major enemies in that quarter. The former before 30 July, 435. An inscription honoring him
refers to Atius' fulfilled prayer for victory over the shows that as of that date he had advanced to vir
Visigoths, whom he tamed in peace as a young hostage spectabilis, the second senatorial rank.86 The reason
to Alaric and in war as a full-grown general.81 Both for his acceptance into the Senate is uncertain, for
sources allude to an oath or prayer of Atius, and there is a gap at a crucial point in the text of the
both emphasize Atius' efforts in peace and war. oration. Still it is conceivable that Merobaudes
Evidently AMtius made some public vow to conquer entered the Senate partly because he used his rhetorical
in war the very peoples whose peacefulness he had skill to praise Atius. Perhaps a verse panegyric
enforced as a boy-hostage. The Senate as a whole celebrating the latter's first consulate of 432 was the
and Merobaudes, a senator himself, took note of this particular reason for the orator's initial distinction.87
affirmation and elaborated on it in terms compre- But becoming a senator was only a beginning phase
hensible to their contemporaries.82 of Merobaudes' official career. He relates that the
. Thus Merobaudes and the Senate acting as a body City of Rome, together with the emperor, fashioned
are early sources of laudatory rhetoric directed to a bronze statue of him.88 This assertion is amply
Atius. They may have provided part of the source documented. During the last century archaeologists
material for the character portraits of Frigeridus and discovered an inscription in the Forum of Trajan.
Jordanes. There is little need to speculate whether Dating from 30 July, 435, it honors a certain "Fl.
Merobaudes afforded some of the inspiration for the Merobaudes."89 A comparison of the contents of the
Senate's statue honoring Aetius. The basic point is inscription with the orator's allegations here leaves
that by the 430's and 440's the Senate was developing no doubt that the orator and Flavius Merobaudes
a rhetorical repository of praise for the general. All are the same man. The inscription, which artfully
extant character sketches of him probably stem in intertwines Merobaudes' military and literary prowess,
some way from this source. The lack of full cor- states that the special honor for this soldier and man
respondence among the portraits shows how extensive of letters is a "representation fashioned in bronze,"
were the Senate's efforts to give Atius a good literary which Rome, together with the Emperors Theodosius
image. The existence of this rhetorical reservoir is II and Valentinian III, erected in Trajan's Forum.90
significant in itself. It may indicate an alliance be- This statue of Merobaudes was famous among con-
temporaries. Hydatius and Sidonius Apollinaris knew
78 Compare especially Merob. Paneg. I frg. IB 9-13 with the83 For the collusion of Aetius with the aristocracy, see the
final phrases of L'Annee epigraphique 1950: no. 30: "mm[or]um
celebrated thesis of Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 337-342,
probo, opum refugo, delato rum ut hostium inimicissimo, vindici
with cautionary remarks by Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968),
libertatis, I pudoris ultor (i). pp. 235-238.
79 Ibid.: "[o] b iuratas bello pace victorias." 84 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 3-7. See above, pp. 35-36.
80 Merob. Paneg. II 130-132.
86 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 1. This sentence is fragmentary,
81 For Aetius as Alaric's hostage, see below, pp. 56-58. but it is almost certain that the missing direct object is me, i.e.,
82 Previous critics of these two passages have been mystified as Merobaudes himself. Cf. Vollmer, MGH.AA 14: p. 9, ad loc.
to their meaning. Bartoli, Rendiconti della Pontificia AccademiaFor the ranking of new senators, cf. Jones, Later Roman Empire
romana di Archeologia 22 (1946-1947): p. 270, interprets the in-(Oxford, 1964) 2: pp. 528-529.
scription's phrase as indicating a concrete act of uncertain nature. 88 CIL 6: no. 1724.
Degrassi, Bullettino della Commissione archeologica comunale di 87 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: pp. 7, 9 and 20; and Olajos,
Roma 72 (1946-1948): p. 36, suggests that it points to Aetius'Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): pp. 173, n. 8, and 180. CIL 6:
assurances of victory during peace and war. As for Merobaudes'no. 1724, contains thanks to Merobaudes for his military prowess
expression, many students attempt to emend the phrase "rataand his poetry. Thus it is possible that a verse panegyric was
fides" in vs. 131. Peerlkamp, Bibliotheca critica nova 2 (1826):an immediate reason for the orator's entry into the Senate.
p. 109, suggests certa fides. Heimsoeth, Rheinisches Museum fiir 88 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 2-3.
Philologie, ser. 2, 2 (1843): p. 540, proposes rarafides. Vollmer, 88 CIL 6: no. 1724 =Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1:
MGH:AA 14: p. 16, ad loc., defends the reading of the manuscript,no. 2950.
but intimates that Merobaudes made a mistake. 90 Ibid.
of it."' One of the more curious aspects of the statue's baudes held the latter rank, and was thus part of the
dedication and Merobaudes' reference to it is the fact lower echelon of the Consistory.96 As Count of the
that the latter mentions only one emperor-probably Consistory he presumably earned the added title of
Valentinian-whereas the former names both.92 The comes primi ordinis, but his distinction within the
orator was certainly aware of Theodosius in relation council depended less on the various honorific designa-
to his official career, for later in his oration he refers tions in his possession than on the qualifying office he
to that emperor as the man who conferred on him had held before admission to the emperor's advisory
his latest honor, the patriciate. In omitting Theo- body.97 The sources are silent regarding the position
dosius as one of the sponsors of his statue, Merobaudes which permitted Merobaudes to become a member
perhaps conveys more of the truth than the dedicatory of the Consistory. He may have held no office at
inscription: Valentinian may have been the only all; an emperor sometimes preferred rhetoricians to
emperor to cause the statue to be erected, but ordered barristers as imperial law officers, and legal Counts
the name of his senior colleague to be included.93 of the Consistory possessed the grade of spectabilis.93
There is one other discrepancy between Merobaudes' But the fact that Merobaudes fought in the Alps
oration and the inscription honoring him, but here before 30 July, 435, suggests that a military command
the orator is clearly indulging in rhetorical distortion. may have furnished him an ex-officio seat on the coun-
In discussing the reason for the erection of the statue, cil. As of that date he possessed the name "Flavius,"
Merobaudes mentions only his praise of Atius, per- which in his case probably indicated an army commis-
haps the verses celebrating the latter's first consulate. sion. It is noteworthy that soldiers with the position
The statue's base, on the other hand, states that of comes rei militaris or dux attained the rank of
M\'erobaudes' skill as soldier and poet earned him the spectabilis. This, plus the fact that both these mili-
distinction. The poet-orator's omission of his own tary posts afforded membership in the Consistory,
military prowess is understandable, for his main pur- raises the possibility that Merobaudes entered that
pose in this panegyric is to celebrate the merits and body as a soldier by virtue of his former tenure of
deeds of his mentor, who may have brought about the either of these commands.99 He may have held one
dedication of the statue.94 of these offices while campaigning in the Alps.'00
The rules of the panegyric, then, forced Merobaudes But if Merobaudes is reluctant to give the full
to gloss over his military ability, an important factor reason for the erection of his statue, he may be less
in causing Rome and the emperors to honor him. reticent in telling of his other deeds. As noted above,
But the inscription at the statue's base specifically a fragmentary sentence of his prose panegyric per-
mentions Merobaudes' campaigns in the Alps-perhaps relates his campaign in Spain in 443.101 The
haps against the Bacaudae-and lists him as being same sentence also takes note of "those who go to
vir spectabilis and Count of the Consistory.95 The Thrace," and here the orator may be speaking of
Consistory was an advisory body to the emperor non-military acts. The fact that the last two frag-
functioning as a council of state and a high court of ments of this panegyric are autobiographical in tone
justice. In Merobaudes' time about twenty civil suggests that Merobaudes refers to himself again.
and military officials served actively on this board. In the last fragment he mentions his own travels
Four of the highest civil officers, with the topmost around Salona on the Dalmatian coast.'02 Since
senatorial rank of vir inlustris, formed the inner core, there is a close paleographical connection between the
while the remaining members were spectabiles. Mero- incomplete clause which speaks of Thrace and Spain
and the sentence recounting the orator's sojourn in
9' Hydat. 128 [Chron. min. 2: p. 24]; and Sidon. Carm. IX Dalmatia, it seems likely that the destination of his
299-301.
trip was Thrace.'03 But what was Merobaudes doing
92 Cf. Dessau, Inscriptiones (Berlin, 1892) 1: no. 2950, n. 3.
93 For Theodosius' role in Merobaudes' attainment of the at Salona on the way to Thrace, probably in the late
patriciate, see again Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 3-5. It is note-
worthy that Sidon. Carm. IX 299-301 mentions only one emperor96 Cf. Nov. Val. VI 3; Cosenza, Official Positions (Lancaster,
-again probably Valentinian-in connection with the erection of 1905), pp. 3-4; L6crivain, Le senat romain (Paris, 1888), pp. 54-
the statue. Cf. Loyen, Sidoine A pollinaire: Poe2mes (Paris, 1960), 55; and especially Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 1:
p. 92, n. 37. I am grateful to Professors S. I. Oost and F. pp. 333-341, 506-507.
Solmsen for assistance on this point. 97 Cf. Sinnigen, Classica et medievalia 24 (1964): pp. 158-159;
94 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 2-3. See above, n. 87. Through- and Jones, Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964) 1: p. 333.
out antiquity artful omissions of some of the merits of soldier- 98 Cf. Jones, ibid., pp. 506-507.
poets (or rhetoricians) seem to have been a regular means of 99Ibid. 1: pp. 333-334, 378-379; 2: pp. 528-529; and 3: pp.
honoring them. For example, inscriptions celebrating Aeschylus 64-65, n. 28. See above, p. 9.
and Dexippus (a rhetorician and defender of Athens in the third 100 See again CIL 6: no. 1724.
century A.D.) omit their literary and military abilities, respec- 101 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIA 22-23. See above, pp. 37-38.
tively. Cf. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa (Leipzig, 1898) 1: 102 Merob. Paneg. I frgg. IIA and B passim, esp. frg. IIA 22-23
pp. 241-242. For the influence of Aetius in the dedication of the and frg. IIB 7-10.
statue of Merobaudes, cf. Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), 103 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 9, ad Merob. Paneg. I frg.
p. 238, n. 108. IIA 23; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): pp. 173 and
95 CIL 6: no. 1724. See above, p. 9. 180.
430's or early 440's?104 Numerous possibilities sug- party, and Theoderic was not present until after the
gest themselves. Perhaps this journey or one like it encounter was over. This clash resembles one of a
took the orator to Constantinople, where he performed series of engagements between Aetius and the Visi-
a literary service which caused Theodosius II to goths in 438.110
grant him the patriciate.105 Thus Merobaudes seemingly presents more internal
There is one further piece of historical information evidence to support the present writer's contention
in Merobaudes' prose panegyric, and at first glance that this prose oration dates from 443-446, rather
it should establish beyond question the date of the than from 437. But it is only possible that the inci-
oration. In the last fragment of the work Mero- dent Merobaudes describes dates from 438; Vollmer's
baudes presents a circumstantial account of a battle date of 430 is also feasible. Sometime between 443
between Aetius and the Visigoths.'06 The Visigoths and 446 Merobaudes apparently presented an oration
had sallied forth to devastate Roman territory, but in the tradition of the gratiarum actio. But his ac-
AMtius ambushed a large detachment of them near a count of the ambush at the Mons colubrarius is not
Mons colubrarius, a mountain of uncertain location specific enough to be used to support the present
but seemingly in southern Gaul. The Visigothic interpretation.
party consisted of more infantry than cavalry, and
PANEGYRIC II
after the initial slaughter Aetius put the surviving
infantrymen to flight and ran down the remainder of Compared with the prose panegyric of 443-446,
the horse. Shortly after the engagement the Visi- Merobaudes' panegyric in verse is easy to interpret in
gothic King Theoderic I came up with the remainder terms of its nature and date. The poet-orator wrote
of his troops and viewed the carnage.'07 Merobaudes' the work in hexameters, but apparently prefaced it
account is very specific, but it does not contain enough with a prose letter of dedication. Lines 106-107 of
datable information. AMtius fought numerous battles the poem indicate that the object of praise-and
with the Visigoths during his campaigns of 425-ca., perhaps the recipient of the epistolary dedication-
430 and 435-439, and it is not surprising that critics was AMtius.l The occasion of the composition was
have associated the clash mentioned by Merobaudes one of Aetius' consulates, for Merobaudes frequently
with both periods of war. For example, Vollmer alludes to the general's assumption of that office and
notes the similarity between Merobaudes' narrative its trappings.2 Atius was consul three times-in
and Hydatius' mention of Aetius' slaughter of a Visi- 432, 437, and 446-but many of the events to which
gothic band in 430. The latter incident took place the panegyrist refers can be dated to the early 440's.
near Arles, and the leader of the Visigoths was not Thus the poet probably delivered this panegyric or a
Theoderic but an aristocrat named Anaolsus.108 The form of it on 1 January, 446, when Aetius began his
resemblance between Hydatius' and Merobaudes' third consulship.3
testimony is sufficient only to make Vollmer's identi- The predominant theme of this composition is peace.
fication possible. Other critics place the fight at the Merobaudes emphasizes it at the beginning and end
Mons colubrarius during the campaign of 435-439. of the surviving fragments of the work (verses 1-49,
This is inherently more conceivable, for Merobaudes 189-194). Even in the middle section of the pane-
refers to the event as recent.109 Now if one strips gyric, where he discusses various phases of war, the
away the panegyrist's glorification of Aetius here, poet occasionally makes an antithetical reference to
there remains something less than an epic battle. peace (lines 98,132,142). In verses 1-49 Merobaudes
AMtius attacked a portion of a large Visigothic raiding describes the state of tranquillity prevailing through-
out the world as a result of Aetius' campaigns.
104 The basis for this chronology is the apparent date of
Panegyric I.
Initially the poet turns to the Rhine-Danube frontier
105 See above, pp. 36-37.
108 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIB 11-24. 110 Prosp. 1333 [Chron. min. 1: p. 476]; Hydat. 112 [ibid. 2:
107 Cf. F. Vollmer, s.v. "Colubrarius mons," RE Supp. 3 (1918): p. 23]. Cf. W. Ensslin, s.v. "Theoderich" (1), RE 5A, 2 (1934):
p. 256; Thesaurus linguae latinae: Onomasticon 2 (1907-1913): pp. 1735-1740, at p. 1737. Note that neither Prosper nor
p. 537, s.v. "Colubrarius" (2); and Thompson, The Early Germans Hydatius specifies that Theoderic led the Visigoths in these
(Oxford, 1965), p. 125. encounters.
108 Hydat. 92 [Chron. min. 2: p. 21]. Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA ' For the nature of the prose preface, cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14:
14: p. 10, ad Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIB 11. Vollmer's conjecture p. 10; Lenz, s.v. "Merobaudes" (3), RE 15, 1 (1931): p. 1044;
has been adopted by Bury, History (London, 1923) 1: p. 242, and Pavlovskis, Rendiconti dell'Istituto lombardo, Classe di lettere
n. 2; and Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 272, n. 4. e scienze morali e storiche 101 (1967): pp. 535-567, esp. p. 539,
109 Merob. Paneg. I frg. IIB 9-10. Cf. Courcelle, Histoire n. 20. Only the last sentence of the preface survives, but since
litte'raire (Paris, 1964), p. 159; Thompson, The Early Germans Merobaudes inherited a strong tradition of a dedicatory prose
(Oxford, 1965), p. 125; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmdnyok 13 (1966): preface, and since Claud. XXIII and Sidon. Carm. I, IV and VI
p. 181, n. 42. Both Courcelle and Thompson place the event in dedicate their panegyrics to the men they are praising, it seems
436, perhaps in keeping with Vollmer's date for Panegyric I. likely that Aetius was the recipient of the dedication.
Even Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 7, flirts with this later date. 2 Merob. Paneg. II 13, 30-38, 43-46. Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Mero-
Olajos suggests that the battle occurred immediately prior to the baudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. 7.
delivery of the panegyric in 437. 3 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 10.
42 CLOVER: FLAVIUS A1EROBAUDES [TRANS. AMER. PHIL. SOC.
to prove his assertion (1-7). In lines 1-4 he observes agreement occurred after the campaigns against the
that the sunburnt lands of the greater Danube Basin, luthungi. It would be more natural for Merobaudes
including the vicinity of the Black Sea, are at peace, to refer to the treaty in particular and to Atius'
perhaps by virtue of a treaty.4 One widely accepted prior exploits in general.9
explanation of this claim is that Merobaudes refers After relating Atius' successes in the Danube
to the time when AMtius was a hostage of the Huns- Basin, Merobaudes addresses himself to equally
probably between 408 and 423.5 This is unlikely. illustrious campaigns on the Rhine frontier. As a
Merobaudes, speaking in the year 446, naturally result of the general's achievements the Rhine has
mentions Aetius' most recent exploits in a given area. pledged under treaty to become Rome's servant, and
None of the other events which he records occurred is happy that Roman control stretches forth on either
before the 430's. Thus it is more conceivable that of its banks.'0 This claim is as extravagant as
AMtius' conquests along the Danube also date from a the one regarding the Danube. Merobaudes asserts
later period. In 430 Aetius defeated the Juthungi, a that Aetius has concluded a treaty or treaties securing
tribe of the Alamannic confederation which had pene- Roman control on both sides of the Rhine. It is
trated the provinces of Noricum and Rhaetia along the unnecessary to expect a panegyrist to offer precise
upper Rhine and upper Danube Rivers. During the geography, but there were at least two barbarian
next year Atius again fought successfully in the same peoples along the Rhine whom AMtius fought periodi-
provinces either against the provincials in revolt or cally, and with whom he probably made treaties:
against invading Alamanni.6 Although there is no the Franks and Burgundians.1" The problem, then,
record of a treaty following these victories, Mero- lies in determining when Atius defeated these con-
baudes may refer in part to them.7 But this inter- federations and reached an accord with them. And
pretation only accounts for his assertion that the one must look to his successes nearest to 1 January,
Danube is at peace.8 The poet includes the region 446, the date of Merobaudes' poetic panegyric.
of the Black Sea in his sweeping perspective, and if It is curious that the early record of the Franks,
one considers his vague geography in its entirety, perhaps the most successful Germanic coalition, is very
one thinks of the Huns as the most prominent people meager. In the fifth century there were roughly two
in this area. Merobaudes probably numbers the groups of Franks, one on the middle right bank and
Huns among the tribes pacified in the Danube Basin. the other on the lower left bank of the Rhine. Tradi-
There is evidence that Aetius did conclude a treaty tionally they were called the Ripuarians and the
with them. In 433 he reached an accord with Rua, Salians, but the sources for the fifth century rarely
King of the Huns, who consequently received the make this distinction. Instead they speak merely
provinces of Pannonia I and Valeria along the Upper of the Franks. Thus it is difficult to sort out the
Danube. Shortly thereafter Atius gave his son scanty information regarding Frankish movements.12
Carpilio as a hostage to the new King Attila. This
I For the treaty, cf. Prisc. Exc. de leg. gent. 5 and Exc. de leg.
Rom. 3 Eed. de Boor 1, 1: p. 128 and 1, 2: p. 579]; Chron. Gall. a.
4 In vs. 1 Merobaudes definitely speaks of "pax." Elsewhere CCCCLII 116 [Chron. min. 1: p. 660]; and Cassiod. Var. I 4,
he uses the word to refer either to a treaty or to a general state 10-11. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: pp. 115, 418, first
of peace. Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 386, s.v. "pax." For the related Merobaudes' testimony to this treaty. For the relevance
poetic image in vs. 2, cf. Vitruv. V 3, 2; IX 1, 16; and Thesaurus of Merobaudes' observations here and the date of the treaty, cf.
linguae latinae 3 (1906-1912): p. 235, s.v. "candeo" (3). The Alfoldi, Der Untergang (Berlin, 1926) 2: p. 90; Ensslin, Philolog-
geography of vss. 1-4 is vague. Merobaudes could conceivably ische Wochenschrift 47 (1927): p. 851; and Altheim, Geschichte
use any one of the three places mentioned here to refer generally (Berlin, 1962) 4: p. 188.
to some area to the north. But all three geographical features- 10 Merob. Paneg. II 5-7. "Foedera" (5) may indicate one
the Danube and Don Rivers and the Caucasus Mountains-are or more treaties. "Alterna" (7) is best taken as a synonym of
found in the Danube-Black Sea region. Since the poet is con- "utraque." Cf. Mart. X 7, 7; Stat. Theb. VI 675-676; Silv. I 3,
sistent, it seems likely that he has this specific area in mind. For 25; Auson. Mos. 286; Heimsoeth, Rheinisches Museum fur
similar poetic references, cf. Mart. IX 101 (compare esp. vs. 21 Philologie, ser. 2, 2 (1843): p. 536; Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 11,
with Merob. Paneg. II 3). ad loc.; and Thesaurus linguae latinae 1 (1900): pp. 1756-1757,
6 Cf. Mommsen, Hermes 36 (1901): p. 518, n. 4; Vollmer, s.v. "alternus."
MGH:AA 14: p. 11, ad loc.; and Thompson, Attila (Oxford, 11 Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824),
1948), p. 33. For the chronology of Aetius' captivity, cf. Sund- p. 13; Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 274, n. 1; and
wall, Westromische Studien (Berlin, 1915), no. 5, pp. 40-41; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 181, n. 45. One can
Demougeot, De l'unite (Paris, 1951), pp. 365-366. exclude the Alamanni along the right bank of the upper Rhine.
6 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 106 [Chron. min. 1: p. 658]; Hydat. Merobaudes may refer to them in a general way in Paneg.
93, 95 [ibid. 2: p. 22]; Sidon. Carm. VII 233-234; Stein, Histoire II 1-4 (see above). Furthermore, there is no evidence that
(Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 321 and 576, n. 23; and Loyen, Recherches Aetius ever concluded a treaty with them. Cf. Schmidt, Die
(Paris, 1942), p. 43. Westgermanen (Munich, 1940), part 1, pp. 52-55.
7 Cf. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: pp. 115, 418. For 12 Stengers, La formation (Brussels, 1959), pp. 25-32, et passim,
the lack of evidence regarding a treaty at this time, cf. Schmidt, argues that the distinction between the Ripuarians and Salians
Die Westgermanen (Munich, 1940), part 1, pp. 52-55. is artificial. To prove his point Stengers (p. 26) dismisses such
8 Danuvius in strict classical usage means only the upper testimony as Sidon. Carm. VII 236-237, where the poet dis-
Danube, while Hister denotes the River's lower portion. But tinguishes between "Francus" and "Salius," on the grounds that
Merobaudes need not be pressed for geographical precision here. Sidonius is merely indulging in a rhetorical flourish (cf. Loyen,
AMtius probably began a running fight with the apparently minted some silver coins of Valentinian III
Ripuarians in 428. He blocked their attempt to and Theodosius II at Trier, perhaps in commemora-
occupy the left bank of the middle Rhine, but seems tion of his successes in the immediate area.'7
not to have concluded a treaty with them at this time.'3 Thus Merobaudes' testimony may relate in part to
Perhaps he did secure a formal agreement by 432.14 the movements of the Ripuarian Franks. It may also
But during the late 430's-surely by ca. 440-the be relevant to the Salians. But although there is
Ripuarians again invaded eastern Gaul, and captured more evidence for the latter, any reconstruction of
Colonia Agrippina (Cologne) and Augusta Trevero- their activity remains uncertain. For the Franks of
rum (Trier)."* In the case of the Franks of the the lower left bank of the Rhine there are two his-
middle Rhine, Merobaudes could hardly refer to torical traditions, one Roman and the other Mero-
Aetius' prior successes which that confederation nulli- vingian. The former is sparse, while the latter is
fied no later than 440. If one interprets literally unstable. During most of Atius' career the King
Merobaudes' allusion to Aetius' exploits on both banks of the Salian Franks seems to have been a certain
of the Rhine, it is likely that the poet relates a victory Clodio. Merovingian accounts place his reign from
over the Ripuarians and an accompanying treaty the late 420's to the late 440's.18 The sixth-century
sometime after ca. 440 and before 446. There is historian Gregory of Tours and other sources deriving
indirect evidence to support this hypothesis. Some partly from him narrate that Clodio left Dispargum
of the Ripuarians were allies of Aetius in 451, and they in Thoringia (Duisburg, Belgium?), his base of opera-
probably concluded an agreement with him before tions, and marched on Turnacum (Tournai). After
this year."6 Furthermore, around 445 or 446 Aetius capturing this city he took Camaracum (Cambrai),
Recherches [Paris, 1942], pp. 43-44). This is undoubtedly true, and then advanced as far as the Somme River.'9 The
but there are two equally valid conclusions to be drawn: (1) Roman testimony is less specific. AMtius may have
Sidonius is aware of a past or traditional distinction between concluded a treaty with Clodio in 432.20 At vicus
two groups of Franks; (2) Sidonius refers rhetorically to a
Helena in northern Gaul he and the future Emperor
differentiation which existed in his own day. It is noteworthy
that Jord. Get. 191 numbers among Aetius' allies at the Battle of Majorian (457-461) attacked a party of Franks under
Catalaunian Fields (451) the "Franci" and "Ripari." In the Clodio's leadership.2'
fifth century a distinction between two groups of Franks may On the basis of this evidence it is difficult to impose
have been blurred and largely traditional, but probably it still
remained. In general, see Weijnen, Frankisch, Merovingisch,
a chronology on Clodio's movements. The Mero-
Karolingisch Studies (Assen, 1965), pp. 1-9. vingian narratives offer no reliable indication of when
13Prosp. 1298 [(zron. min. 1: p. 472]; and Cassiod. Chron. the king made his encroachments. Indeed it is pos-
1217 [ibid. 2: p. 156]. Prosper's phrase "propinqua Rheno" is sible that some of these advances did not occur during
more applicable to the Ripuarians than the Salians. Cf. Baynes,
Clodio's reign.22 The only source presenting a defi-
Jour. Roman Studies 12 (1922): p. 221; Stein, Histoire (Paris,
1959) 1: pp. 318 and 575, n. 6; Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), nite chronological context is Sidonius Apollinaris, who
p. 65; Verlinden, Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanden relates the battle fought at vicus Helena. Sidonius
1 (1946): pp. 1-8; and Blok, De Franken (Bussum, 1968), pp. indicates that the encounter took place before Atius
16-17.
removed Majorian as a possible candidate for the
14 Hydat. 98 [Chron. min. 2: p. 22]; cf. Jord. Get. 176. But
since Hydatius does not present any geographical details, he
imperial succession. Thus the clash probably oc-
could just as well refer to the Salians. Cf. Verlinden, Bijdragen curred before 451.23 According to Sidonius, the
voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanden 1 (1946): p. 8; Loyen, engagement at vicus Helena was an epic battle, but
Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 72; and Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) the details he gives do not support his view. Atius
1: pp. 321-322, and 581, n. 67 (with Palanque's note ad loc.).
and Majorian merely attacked a Frankish wedding
15 Salv. De gub. Dei VI 39, 74, 89; Ep. I 5-6. Cf. Stein,
Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 323 and 577, n. 33; and Verlinden,
Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanden 1 (1946): pp. 8-10.17 Cf. Cahn, Revue suisse de numismatique 27 (1937): p. 430;
16 Cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: p. 332 and 581, n. 66, and Lafaurie, Annales de Normandie 14 (1964): pp. 179-180.
who cites Merob. Paneg. II 5-7, Prisc. Exc. de leg. gent. 8 [ed. de 18 Lib. hist. Franc. 5. Sigebertus gemblacensis s.aa. 430 and
Boor 1, 2: pp. 582-583], Lib. hist. Franc. 8 and Sidon. Carm. VII 448 [MGH: Scriptores 6: pp. 307, 309]; and Mommsen, Chron.
390-391. Verlinden, Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis der Neder- min. 1: p. 658, ad Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 103, s.a. 428. Cf.
landen 1 (1946): pp. 10-11, accepts Stein's reconstruction. Jullian, Revue de Paris 35, 5 (1928): pp. 266-271.
Priscus mentions Attila's and Aetius' intervention during 450 in 19 Greg. Tur. HF II 9; Lib. hist. Franc. 5; Sigebertus gembla-
the Frankish succession and their alliances with the elder and censis s.aa. 430, 431, 445, 448 [MGH: Scriptores 6: pp. 307-309].
younger sons of the recently deceased king. It is possible that For the various theories regarding the location of "Dispargum
Aetius renewed a treaty which had existed under the previous . . . in terminum Thoringorum" (Greg. Tur. II 9), cf. de Boone,
ruler. But since Priscus merely speaks of the "Franks" here it De Franken (Amsterdam, 1954), p. 142; Wallace-Hadrill, Long-
is possible that he refers to the Salian division. Cf. de Boone, haired Kings (London, 1962), p. 159, n. 3; and Weijnen, Frankisch,
De Franken (Amsterdam, 1954), p. 144. Nevertheless, there is Merovingisch, Karolingisch Studies (Assen, 1965), pp. 4-5.
no evidence that the Salians fought for Attila in 451, while other 20 Hydat. 98 [Chron. min. 2: p. 22]. But see above, n. 14.1
sources show that the Ripuarians fought on the side of both 21Sidon. Carm. V 206-230.
Attila and Aetius. Cf. Sidon. Carm. VII 321-325 and Jord. Get. 22 Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 73, n. 4; and Will,
191. The fact that the Ripuarians were directly in Attila's path Revue du Nord 48 (1966): p. 518.
of invasion, whereas the Salians were not, also tends to suggest 23Sidon. Carm. V 126-304. Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 59
that the former were the object of attention in 450. (1964): pp. 23 and 29, n. 6.
party.24 But the incidental information which Si- Thus the encounter at vicus Helena occurred probably
donius includes puts this minor engagement in good after 446 and certainly before 451.31
perspective. Prior to the skirmish Clodio had invaded Although Stein's reconstruction has received gen-
the civitas A trebatum, roughly the northernmost tip eral acceptance,32 there is one difficulty with it.
of France. The clash took place at vicus Helena, Stein's date for Majorian's exploits at Tours stems
within the boundaries of the civitas.25 The exact loca- from a chronology of Bacaudic activity which has
tion of this village is uncertain, but it may be gen- recently undergone revision. A major source for the
erally placed southwest of Tournai and west or north- disturbances of the Bacaudae during the 440's is the
west of Cambrai.28 At first glance one might expect Life of St. Germanus, Bishop of Auxerre, written in
Clodio's thrust into the civitas Atrebatum to follow the late fifth century by Constantius, a priest of Lyons.
the capture of Tournai, and perhaps also the occupa- Constantius notes Bacaudic unrest immediately
tion of Cambrai.A7 But this reconstruction involves prior to Germanus' death, which has generally been
the dangerous assumption that Clodio advanced placed in 448 to conform with the testimony of an
steadily from these two cities toward the Somme.28 anonymous Gallic chronicle regarding Bacaudic nmove-
Thus it is hard not only to date Clodio's major incur- ments. But a recent examination of the life of
sions, but also to fix the exact year in which the en- Germanus has shown that the Bishop probably died
counter at vicus Helena occurred.29 on 31 July, 445. Thus Constantius refers to the
According to one school of thought, Aetius and turbulence of the Bacaudae from ca. 442 to 445, for
Majorian defeated the Salians at vicus Helena in the which there is good evidence, rather than that of 448.
late 420's or early 430's, when the chronicles indicate Indeed, when one removes the documentation of the
a fair amount of Frankish activity.30 But this date Life of St. Germanus from the vicinity of 448, there
is unlikely, for Sidonius implies that the incident took remains the Gallic chronicle's mention of the flight of
place not long before 451, the terminus ante quem for a Bacaudic physician named Eudoxius to Attila the
Majorian's forced retirement. For this reason there Hun. Such an observation need not indicate Bacaudic
has been a recent tendency to place the event in the unrest such as that which Majorian apparently con-
440's. Stein advances the key argument in favor of fronted.33 In view of this revised chronology, it is
this chronology. Sidonius states that the skirmish
31 Cf. Sidon. Carm. V 210-213; and Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959)
at vicus Helena occurred just after Majorian's defense 1: pp. 332 and 581, n. 67. For the activity of the Armorican
of Turones (Tours). Since Tours is in a region of Bacaudae, see below, pp. 46-50. The fact that Sidonius por-
Gaul called Armorica, and since Armorica was a trays Majorian as iuvenis even in 458 cannot be pressed as a
center of Bacaudic activity, it seems likely that good chronological guide. Sidonius may use the term only in a
complimentary sense. But as a general indicator it does reinforce
Majorian's campaign at Tours was an episode of the
Stein's other evidence. See also de Boone, De Franken (Amster-
disturbances of the Bacaudae. In view of the ap- dam, 1954), p. 141; and Meyer, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 62
parent fact that Majorian was relatively young when (1969): pp. 5-6.
Sidonius honored him with a panegyric in 458, it 32 Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 68, and Revue des
seems best to associate the protection of Tours with etudes anciennes 46 (1944): p. 122, who dates the engagement to
448/9; Schmidt, Klio 34 (1942): pp. 308-309 (around 446);
the unrest of the Bacaudae which began after 445.
Verlinden, Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanden 1 (1946
p. 12, Trans. Royal Hist. Soc., ser. 5, 4 (1954): p. 11, and Les
24 Sidon. Carm. V 206-230. Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, origines (Brussels, 1955), p. 55 (446 or shortly thereafter, and
1942), p. 73; Loyen, Revue des etudes anciennes 46 (1944): p. 133;before 451); Stengers, La formation (Brussels, 1959), p. 26
and Will, Revue du Nord 48 (1966): p. 518. (between 446 and 451); Demougeot, Le Moyen Age 68 (1962): pp.
26Sidon. Carm. V 212-216. 39-40 (446); Wallace-Hadrill, The Long-haired Kings (London,
1962), pp. 158-159 (446); Weijnen, Frankisch, Merovingisch
26 Derolez, Revue du Nord 40 (1958): p. 512, confirms the loca-
tion of vicus Helena in the civitas Atrebatum. The results of Karolingisch Studies (Assen, 1965), p. 5 (446); Evison, The
Fifth-Century Invasions (London, 1965), p. 83 (446); Leduque,
recent attempts to determine the village's precise location vary
considerably. Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp. 68-73;Recherches (Lille, 1966), p. 18 (around 448); Will, Revue du Nord,
Loyen, Revue des etudes anciennes 46 (1944): pp. 121-134; 48 (1966): p. 517 (448); Nimal, Naissance (Bapaume, 1966),
Leduque, Recherches (Lille, 1966), p. 18; Nimal, Revue du Nordp. 105 (around 448); see also Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844),
47 (1965): pp. 635-638; Nimal, Naissance (Bapaume, 1966), pp. pp. 76-78 (before 447/8); and von Petrikovits, Festschrift f#r
100-110; and Will, Revue du Nord 48 (1966): pp. 517-525. August Oxe zum 75. Geburtstag 23 Juli 1938 (Darmstadt, 1938),
p. 239 (around 446).
27 Cf. Loyen, Revue des etudes anciennes 46 (1944): pp. 121-134;
and Will, Revue du Nord 48 (1966): pp. 517-518. 33 Cf. Vit. Germ. 28, 40; Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 133 [Chron.
28 Cf. Will, Revue du Nord 48 (1966): p. 518. min. 1: p. 662]; and Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 331-332
29 For notable attempts to construct a coherent chronology, and 580-581, nn. 65 and 67 (with additional observations by
cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 321, 332, 349, 367; Loyen, Palanque ad loc.). Some students associate Majorian's actions
Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp. 68-73; Loyen, Revue des etudes with the Bacaudic troubles of the early 440's. Cf. Levison,
anciennes 46 (1944), pp. 121-134; Verlinden, Bijdragen voor de Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft fur altere deutsche Geschichtskunde
geschiedenis der Nederlanden 1 (1946): pp. 1-15; Verlinden, Les 29 (1904): at p. 140; and Lot, La Gaule (Paris, 1967), p. 360.
origines (Brussels, 1955), pp. 47-57, et passim; and Verlinden, Czuth, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 36-38, accepts the
Trans. Royal Hist. Soc., ser. 5, 4 (1954): pp. 1-17. revised chronology of Germanus' life discussed here, but still
30 See, for example, Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), dates the defense of Tours to 448. Sz'adeczky-Kardoss, s.v.
p. 274. "Bagaudae," RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 352, associates the defense
possible that Aetius and Majorian fought at vicus to Rome.4' Merobaudes' vague geography fits not
Helena sometime between 442 and 445.3 only the Ripuarians on the middle right bank but the
There is some evidence to support this dating, but Salians on the lower left bank. The poet may well
none of it is decisive. Immediately before mentioning refer to Atius' successful efforts to stop Clodio's
Majorian's defense of Tours, Sidonius speaks of him advance prior to 1 January, 446. If he does, he adds
drinking from the frozen Loire River. Tours is on a significant detail: Aetius concluded a treaty with
the Loire, and the poet may be saying that Majorian Clodio. Certainly the Salians fought against Attila
performed his services for the city during the winter.35 the Hun as Aetius' allies in 451.42
But it is unusual for the Loire to freeze in winter. Thus the relevance of Merobaudes' testimony to the
Sidonius may be putting a rhetorical touch on an movements of the Franks is uncertain. In contrast,
ordinary winter, but it is also possible that he takes the task of determining its relation to Aetius' victories
account of a very severe season in Gaul. It is note- over the Burgundians is relatively simple. Around
worthy that the chronicler Marcellinus recalls an ex- 435/6 Atius attacked the Burgundian King Gunda-
tremely harsh winter for the year 443. Thus Majorian har, who had left territory previously assigned him
may have defended Tours during the winter of 442/3 on the left bank of the Rhine and had invaded either
or 443/4. The engagement at vicus Helena would the province of Belgica I or Belgica II. Very soon
have occurred shortly afterward.36 Now a novel of Aitius received the king's submission. In 437 the
Valentinian suggests that Aetius was in Gaul in Huns, apparently under Aetius' direction, inflicted a
445.37 The twelfth-century chronicler Sigebert of crushing defeat on the Burgundians, killing twenty
Gembloux, whose chronology is admittedly weak, thousand of them.43 In 443 AMtius renewed a treaty
dates to 445 Clodio's advance from Tournai to the which the Burgundians of the left bank had con-
Somme.38 Finally, Aetius apparently issued silver cluded with the Romans in the early part of the fifth
coins in 445-446 from the mint at Trier. Perhaps century. By virtue of this accord he assigned the
he was commemorating not only his victory over survivors of the disaster of 437 the territory of
the Ripuarian but also over the Salian Franks.39 The Sapaudia (Savoy).4 The Burgundians of Savoy
evidence presented here is not conclusive, but it
suggests that the engagement at vicus Helena occurred 41 Merob. Paneg. II 5-7.
between 442 and 445, perhaps in 445.4? 42 For the Salians as Roman allies in 451, cf. Greg. Tur. HF
II 7; Jord. Get. 191; and Paul. Diac. Hist. Rom. XIV 4. Some
In this framework it is interesting to recall the
students of this problem maintain that Merobaudes provides a
testimony of Merobaudes. The Rhine, pacified on terminus ante quem for the encounter at vicus Helena. Cf. Hasse-
both banks, accepts treaties pledging its subservience brauk, Westrom (Braunschweig, 1899), p. 26, n. 78; de Boone,
De Franken (Amsterdam, 1954), p. 187, n. 1002; and Musset,
Les invasions (Paris, 1965), p. 123. According to Wurm, De
with the activity of the Armorican Bacaudae during the 440's. rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), pp. 76-78, Merobaudes notes a treaty
The chronology of the movements of the Armorican Bacaudae with the Salians as of 446; but Wurm does not assign a definite
will receive fuller discussion below, pp. 48-50. date to Aetius' success in the civitas Atrebatum. Verlinden,
340nce again, Sidon. Carm. V 210-213 notes that the latter Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanden 1 (1946): pp. 10-12,
engagement occurred "post tempore parvo." regards Merobaudes' testimony as a terminus post quem, but this
" Sidon. Carm. V 206-211. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), line of reasoning stems from Stein's chronology.
p. 64, n. 2, maintains that the catalog of rivers here is merely 43 Sidon. Carm. VII 234-235; Prosp. 1322 [Chron. min. 1: p.
Sidonius' way of saying that Majorian is known throughout Gaul, 475]; Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 118 [ibid., p. 660]; Hydat. 108,
but (p. 68) he tentatively associates vss. 209-210 with a winter 110 [ibid. 2: pp. 22-23]; Cassiod. Chron. 1226 [ibid., p. 156];
campaign at Tours. Chron. Gall. a. DXI 596 [ibid. 1 p. 661]; Fredegar. II 51; and
36 Marcell. Com. s.a. 443, 1 [Chron. min. 2: p. 81]; cf. de Boone, Paul. Diac. Hist. Rom. XIV 5. Cf. Coville, Recherches (Paris,
De Franken (Amsterdam, 1954), pp. 141 and 187, n. 1007. See 1928), pp. 105-109; Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 322-323;
above, n. 33. Schmidt, Die Ostgermanen (Munich, 1934), p. 137; Loyen,
37 Nov. Val. XVII. Cf. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 44; Wackwitz, Gab es ein Burgund-
pp. 76-78; and Langgartner, Die Gallienpolitik (Bonn, 1964), erreich in Worms? (Worms, 1964-1965) 1: pp. 50-52, and 2: pp.
pp. 74-76. 49-56; Guichard, Essai (Paris, 1965), pp. 181-182, 193-194, 211-
38 Sigebertus gemblacensis s.a. 445 [MGH: Scriptores 6: p. 308]. 215; and Perrin, Les Burgondes (Neuchatel, 1968), pp. 263-267.
Cf. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), pp. 76-78; and de Boone, It is not certain whether the Huns who crushed the Burgundians
De Franken (Amsterdam, 1954), p. 141. For Sigebert's chronicle, were in Aetius' service. Cf. Altheim, Geschichte der Hunnen
cf. Potthast, Bibliotheca historica (Berlin, 1896) 2: pp. 1016-1017. (Berlin, 1962) 4: p. 194; Wackwitz (1: p. 51); and Perrin (pp.
Sigebert's chronology cannot be used without other sources to 265-266). But the Gallic chronicle of 452 (see above) credits
control it. According to him, for example, St. Augustine died Aetius with the slaughter of the Burgundians. In addition,
in 440! Coville (p. 107), on the basis of a reading of Hydatius in Fredegar.
39 See above, p. 43. II 51, adopts the following punctuation of Hydat. 110, which was
40 Hassebrauk, Westrom (Braunschweig, 1899), p. 26, dates the suggested before Mommsen's version became current: "Narbona
incident to 445; de Boone, De Franken (Amsterdam, 1954), pp. obsidione liberatur. Aetio duce et magistro militum, Burgun-
129, 140-141, places it around 443 or shortly thereafter; Musset, dionum caesa XX millia." Thus it appears that Aetius had a
Les invasions (Paris, 1965), p. 123, n. 1, suggests that it occurred hand in the slaughter of 437.
around 440; and a date of ca. 445 is adopted by Blok, De Franken 44 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 128 [Chron. min. 1: p. 660]. Cf.
(Bussum, 1968), p. 18; and Meyer, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 62 Coville, Recherches (Paris, 1928), pp. 109-117; Schmidt, Die
(1969): pp. 5-6. Ostgermanen (Munich, 1934), pp. 138-139; Stein, Histoire (Paris,
46 CLOVER: FLAVlUS MEROBAUDES [TRANS. AMER. PHIL. SOC.
seem to have observed their new treaty faithfully, more and more preoccupied with barbarian invasions,
for they fought with Atius at the Battle of the peasant movements grew stronger.49 The Bacaudae
Catalaunian Fields in 451, and there is no evidence were one such movement, and their activity spread
that they broke their treaty between 443 and 451.45 over parts of Gaul and Spain. By the fifth century
Indeed, if Merobaudes' vague geography be taken to impoverished free farmers and coloni formed the core
include Savoy, the Burgundians were true to their of the Bacaudic revolt, and the periphery consisted of
treaty as of 1 January, 446.46 army deserters, runaway slaves, bandits, and perhaps
Having accounted for AMtius' successes along the dissident urban elements and displaced barbarian
northern frontier of the Roman Empire, Merobaudes settlers (laeti).50 Even some members of the upper
turns in verses 8-22 to an important area inside the class seem to have joined or sympathized with the
Rhine defenses: Gaul. Here he notes a dissident ele- rebels." The Bacaudic unrest cannot be termed a
ment sometimes within and at times outside Roman political revolution, an eruption whose aim is to over-
society, and an inveterate barbarian enemy of the throw the established element of power. Nor can one
Romans. In lines 8-15 he speaks of a recalcitrant call the insurgency a social revolution or class struggle.
farmer returning to his plow and obeying Roman law. These terms imply that varying groups of society have
In contrast to his earlier use of vague geographical a class-consciousness and a positive goal for insurrec-
terms, Merobaudes specifies the area of unrest (8): tion, and there is no good evidence that the Bacaudae
the tractus Armoricanus, a region which by the fifth possessed such traits. On the other hand, they are not
century extended from the Gironde to the Somme to be regarded as mere bandits or robbers. They seem
River, and reached inland as far as Orleans and to have had a definite, albeit negative goal; freedom
Auxerre. As of the fifth century there was a large from Roman oppression. They did not necessarily
Celtic population in this territory.47 Armorica was want to dissociate themselves from the Roman pattern
a major theater of activity of the Bacaudae, who were of living altogether, for this was the only way of life to
among the most notorious dissidents in the Later which they were accustomed. Instead, they appar-
Roman Empire.48 ently desired to rectify the misgovernment of the
In late antiquity the burden of maintaining the Roman authorities by establishing a separate, quasi-
vast bureaucracy and army of the Roman Empire independent society on the Roman model.52 By the
weighed heavily on the peasants. In the West small
49 Cf. Salv. De gub. Dei V 21-27; Thompson, Past and Present
farmers bore the onus not only of exactions by Roman
2 (1952): pp. 11-23; Engelmann, Vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit
officials, but also by large landowners, for whom they (Berlin, 1956), pp. 373-385; Giinther, Zeitschrift fur Geschichts-
often worked as coloni, or tenant farmers. The usual wissenschaft, Sonderheft: Evolution und Revolution in der Weltge-
result of this oppression was the ruin of small pro- schichte 13 (1965): pp. 19-34; and Korsunski, Bibliotheca classica
orientalis 6 (1961): pp. 82-89. Korsunski's work is also sum-
prietors and tenants. One way out for ruined peasants
marized and discussed by Seyfarth, Neue sowjetische Beitrdge
was simply to rebel or withdraw from Roman society. (Berlin, 1960), pp. 7-13.
As the Roman establishment in the West became 60 Cf. Salv. De gub. Dei V 21-27, with commentary by Czuth,
Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 15 and 34-35; Thompson, Past
1959) 1: pp. 331 and 580, n. 63; Guichard, Essai (Paris, 1965), and Present 2 (1952): pp. 11-23; Engelmann, Vom Mittelalter zur
pp. 211-235; Wackwitz, Gab es ein Burgunderrich in Worms? Neuzeit (Berlin, 1956), pp. 373-385; Seston, Propylden-Weltge-
(Worms, 1964-1965) 1: p. 53 and 2: p. 56; and Perrin, Les schichte (Berlin, 1963) 4: p. 567; Gunther, Zeitschrift fur Geschi-
Burgondes (Neuchatel, 1968), pp. 287-308. chtswissenschaft 13 (1965): pp. 19-34; Mac Mullen, Enemies
45 Jord. Get. 191; L. Burg. XVII 1; and Paul. Diac. Hist. Rom. (Cambridge, 1966), pp. 192-241; Korsunski, Bibliotheca classica
XIV 5. Cf. Coville, Recherches (Paris, 1928), pp. 118-119; orientalis 6 (1961): pp. 82-89; Seyfarth, NeuesowjetischeBeitrdge
Schmidt, Die Ostgermanen (Munich, 1934), pp. 138-139; Loyen, (Berlin, 1960), pp. 7-13; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss.,
Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 52; Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: Chicago, 1962), pp. 7-11, 38-40. Sirago, Galla Placidia (Lou-
p. 334; Guichard, Essai (Paris, 1965), pp. 182, 214-215, 238-243; vain, 1961), pp. 368-398, takes a similar view, but (pp. 499-510)
and Perrin, Les Burgondes (Neuchatel, 1968), pp. 308-324. maintains that the terms Bacauda and laetus represent the same
46 Merob. Paneg. II 5-7. category of person. This theory has been seriously questioned
4 Cf. Loyen, Sidoine Apollinaire et l'esprit precieux (Paris, by Ruggini, Athenaeum, ser. 2, 40 (1962): pp. 380-382. See also
1943), p. 50; and E. N. Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago, Sziadeczky-Kardoss, s.v. "Bagaudae," RE Supp. 11 (1968): pp.
1962), pp. 18-22. As Merobaudes himself recognizes (Paneg. 347 and 352.
11 12), this area had given the Romans trouble even during the 51 Cf. Salv. De gub. Dei V 21-27; Engelmann, Vom Mittelalter
time of Julius Caesar. Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae zur Neuzeit (Berlin, 1956), p. 383; Sirago, Galla Placidia (Lou-
(Bonn, 1824), p. 13. vain, 1961), pp. 395-398; and Mac Mullen, Enemies (Cambridge,
48 Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 45; Thompson, Past 1966), p. 199.
and Present 2: (1952): p. 16; Thompson, Jour. Roman Studies 46 52 Cf. Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 11-23;
(1956): p. 73; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago, Korsunski, Bibliotheca classica orientalis 6 (1961): pp. 82-89;
1962), pp. 16-22. J. Wallace-Hadrill, Bull. John Rylands Seyfarth, Neue sowjetische Beitrdge (Berlin, 1960), pp. 7-13;
Library 44 (1961-1962): p. 215, n. 2, correctly notes that the terms Gunther, Zeitschrift fur Geschichtswissenschaft 13 (1965): pp.
Bacauda and Armorica are not synonymous, but implies that 19-34; and especially Mac Mullen, Enemies (Cambridge, 1966),
Armorica was not an area of Bacaudic insurgency. But the pp. 192-241 and 255-268. Some students of late antiquity see
activity which Merobaudes describes here fits well the general the movement of the Bacaudae as a social revolution or class
pattern of Bacaudic behavior known from other sources (see struggle. See, for example, Engelmann, Vom Mittelalter zur
below). Neuzeit (Berlin, 1956), pp. 373-385; Mazzarino, Il passaggio
latter half of the where their partial

fifth function was to keep
century the watch on the
mov
From a Marxist point of view, the reason for its Bacaudae.56
failure is simple. The Bacaudae were a symptom of Merobaudes offers support for the view of the
a general crisis within the Roman Empire, which was Bacaudae presented by other sources. According to
a slave-holding society. The crisis involved a transi- him the dissident farmer of Armorica returns to his
tion in late antiquity to feudalism, the origins of field and begins to till it again as a result of Aetius'
which lay in the colonate, the system of tenant farm-
conquests. Previously the forests in the peasant's
ing. The Bacaudae went counter to this trend, and territory were repositories of booty. Of course the
their ill fortune was a prognosis of the success of Bacaudae were active in Armorica. In their ranks
feudalism in the Early Middle Ages.53 there were many ruined farmers who had deserted
The meager sources for the Bacaudae present only their land. Such men made up the core of the armed
a vague picture of their behavior. From the Roman bands which raided estates and cities.57 But there
standpoint they were outlaws, for they sought to are further similarities between the testimony of
maintain themselves outside the pale of Roman civil Merobaudes and other sources. When the poet
law.54 They operated in armed bands, robbing large speaks of the Armorican dissident upholding the laws
estates and attacking cities. At times they may have received under Aetius' guidance, he implies that the
deprived large landowners of their estates and forced insurgent had refused to accept these statutes prior
them to work their own holdings.55 It is noteworthyto AMtius' campaigns. Again this is a regular feature
that for some sectors of Roman society the Bacaudae of Bacaudic behavior. The Bacaudae set up their
offered an attraction similar to that of the barbarian own rudimentary legal system independent of but
kingdoms of the West. Those who were disenchanted sometimes resembling Roman civil law.58 Finally,
with the Roman way of life seemingly regarded eitherMerobaudes mentions that the recently pacified peas-
organization as a suitable alternative to Roman op- ant of Armorica stirs up his furrow with Gothic plows,
but avoids associating with these barbarian neighbors.
pression. Under these circumstances it is not sur-
This is probably more than a poet's way of saying that
prising that the Bacaudae and the barbarians occa-
sionally had similar interests. The latter sometimes
66 Salv. De gub. Dei V 22 speaks of the Bacaudae and the
cooperated with the former in order to enhance their barbarians as possessing a similar appeal. Cf. Seyfarth, Neue
position against the Romans. But whenever the sowjetische Beitrage (Berlin, 1960), p. 11; Gunther, Zeitschrift fiir
barbarians achieved a measure of stability in relation Geschichtswissenschaft 13 (1965): p. 30; and Sz'adeczky-Kardoss,
RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 351. For occasional cooperation between
to the Romans, they generally regarded the Bacaudae barbarians and Bacaudae, and the basically conservative attitude
as a threat to their own status. The Romans may of the former toward the latter, cf. Mazzarino, Il passaggio
have taken occasional advantage of this confluence of (Spoleto, 1962), p. 422; Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961),
p. 509; Seston, Propylden-Weltgeschichte (Berlin, 1963) 4: p. 567;
interest and established barbarians as allies in areas
Musset, Les invasions (Paris, 1965), p. 228; and Sirotenko,
Bibliotheca classica orientalis 13 (1968): pp. 172-177. Engelmann,
Vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit (Berlin, 1956), pp. 380-384, and
(Spoleto, 1962), pp. 410-425 and 434-445; and Sirago, Galla Gunther (p. 31) ignore evidence of occasional collaboration be-
Placidia (Louvain, 1961), pp. 368-398. tween the two elements, and assert that any suggestion of a joint
63 Cf. Engelmann, Vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit (Berlin, 1956),effort is unproven. For the Romans' practice of settling bar-
pp. 373-385; Korsunski, Bibliotheca classica orientalis 6 (1961):barians as watchdogs over the Bacaudae (especially in southern
pp. 82-89; Seyfarth, Neue sowjetische Beitrdge (Berlin, 1960), pp.Gaul), cf. Thompson, Jour. Roman Studies 46 (1956): pp. 65-75.
7-13; and Gunther, Zeitschrift fur Geschichtswissenschaft 13 The arguments of J. Wallace-Hadrill, Bull. John Rylands Library
(1965): pp. 19-34. See also Mazzarino, II passaggio (Spoleto, 44 (1961-1962): pp. 213-237, make it unlikely that the primary
1962), pp. 423-424; and Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961),motive for establishing barbarians in southern Gaul was to keep
pp. 3 75-3 76.
an eye on the Bacaudae. Nevertheless, in view of the common
54 Cf. Salv. De gub. Dei V 24-26, with commentary by Czuth,interests of Romans and barbarians regarding the Bacaudae, it
Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 34-35; Thompson, Past and seems possible that the latter's presence was a partial factor in
Present 2 (1952): pp. 18-19; Korsunski, Bibliotheca classica causing Aetius to settle barbarians in adjacent areas.
orientalis 6 (1961): p. 86; Seyfarth, Neue sowjetische Beitrage 57 Merob. Paneg. II 8-15. Cf. Thompson, Past and Present 2
(Berlin, 1960), p. 11; Mac Mullen, Enemies (Cambridge, 1966),(1952): pp. 16-18; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago,
pp. 192-241; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago, 1962),1962), pp. 14-22.
pp. 23-37.
58 Merob. Paneg. II 13. For similar behavior, cf. Querolus
56 Cf. Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 18-19; Engel- Act 1, Scene 2 (ed. Ermich, p. 68), and Rutil. Namat. I 213-216,
mann, Vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit (Berlin, 1956), p. 381; as and
elucidated by Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 18-19;
Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago, 1962), p. 39. Korsun- Thompson, Antiquity 30 (1956): p. 165, n. 13; and Borza, "The
ski objects to the expropriation of estates as a basic goal of the
Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago, 1962), pp. 23-27. See also Czu'th,
Bacaudae. Cf. Seyfarth, Neue sowjetische Beitrage (Berlin, 1960),
Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 14 and 32-33; Corsaro, Querolus
p. 11; and Bibliotheca classica orientalis 6 (1961): pp. 84 and 88.
(Bologna, 1965), pp. 100-102; and Castorina, Claudio Rutilio
He is probably right, but Rutil. Namat. I 213-216, as elucidated Namaziano (Florence, 1967), p. 173. Thompson holds that
by Thompson and Borza (see above), seems to indicate that the
Merobaudes possibly confirms his interpretation, based mainly
Bacaudae did adopt the practice on occasion. See also Czu'th, on Rutilius, that the Bacaudae expropriated estates and enslaved
Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 14 and 32-33; and Castorina their former owners. This seems to follow from Rutilius, but I
(ed.), Claudio Rutilio Namaziano (Florence, 1967), p. 173. fail to see how Merobaudes supports this view.
Armorica and the Visigothic kingdom of Gaul were same time Atius was occupied with a campaign
contiguous. Merobaudes suggests that the Armorican against the Burgundians,62 and he gave a subordinate
Bacaudae occasionally cooperated with the Visigoths named Litorius the task of reducing the rebels in
against the Romans.59 Armorica.63 By 437 Litorius put an end to resistance
Although there is evidence of peasant unrest and in that area, and either he or Aetius succeeded in
extensive brigandage in the West as early as the second capturing Tibatto and imprisoning or killing the other
century A.D., the sources do not use the term Bacauda leaders of the insurrection. These combined opera-
to describe such insurgency until the late third cen- tions stopped the revolt of the Bacaudae for the
tury, when the Emperor Maximian crushed a rebellion moment.64 Now it is possible that Merobaudes refers
in Gaul around 283-285. Activity characteristic of in a general way to Aetius' successes in 437,65 but,
the Bacaudae occurred intermittently in northern since the Bacaudae were restive between that year
Gaul between ca. 407 and ca. 417, but it is not until and 446, his allusions cannot entirely fit a victory
the third decade of the fifth century that the literary which the insurgents subsequently nullified. Around
evidence again speaks of the Bacaudae. By the 440 the Bacaudae were quite restive.66 In 441 or
fifth century the word Bacauda came to signify not 442 AMtius, fearing another general outbreak, ob-
only peasant unrest in northern Gaul, but turbulence tained the assistance of the Alans, Iranian steppe
in other parts of the West. Disturbances in the Alps nomads who had circulated in Gaul and other parts
and northern Spain are attributed to the Bacaudae of the West since the beginning of the fifth century.
in some sources. From the late 430's to the early He arranged for a portion of the Alans under King
450's the Bacaudae were particularly active in Gaul Goar to settle in Armorica in a line running from
and northern Spain. They are last mentioned in the Aureliani (Orleans) on the Loire to the Baie de la
year 454.6? Seine. By introducing the Alans into the midst of the
Of course Merobaudes speaks only of the disturb- tractus Armoricanus he hoped at least to keep the
ances of the Armorican Bacaudae which occurred
tion of "Gallia Ulterior," cf. Levison, Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft
before 1 January, 446, and with which Aetius became fur dltere deutsche Geschichtskunde 29 (1904): pp. 136-138;
involved. Several sources state or imply that Aetius Czuth, pp. 35-36; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago,
campaigned against the Bacaudae in the late 430's. 1962), pp. 41-43. Borza notes that the Gallic chronicle does not
In 435 a Celtic leader named Tibatto started a associate Tibatto with Armorica, and raises the possibility that
this area may not have been connected with his rebellion origi-
Bacaudic rebellion in Gallia Ulterior, an area em- nating in Gallia Ulterior. But there are at least two points in
bracing roughly northern Gaul and probably includ- favor of a connection: (1) Tibatto is a Celtic name, and there was
ing Armorica. The dissidents withdrew from Roman a large Celtic population in Armorica; cf. Holder, Alt-celtischer
society, and soon many of the lower elements through-Sprachschatz (Leipzig, 1904) 2: pp. 1832-1833, s.v. "Tibatto";
(2) Vit. Germ. 28 and 40 directly connect Tibatto with Armorica.
out Gaul joined in the sedition.6" At about this
62 Hydat. 108 [Chron. min. 2: p. 22]; Prosp. 1322 [ibid. 1:
69 Merob. Paneg. II 14-15. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis re- p. 475]; and Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 118 [ibid., p. 660]. Cf.
liquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. 13, and Hansen, De vita Aetii (Dorpat, Coville, Recherches (Paris, 1928), p. 107; and Loyen, Recherches,
1840), part 2, p. 14, n. 121, both interpret Merobaudes as saying p. 46. See above, pp. 45-46.
merely that Armorica and the Visigothic kingdom in Gaul shared 63Sidon. Carm. VII 246-248; Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942),
a boundary. Thompson, Historia 12 (1963): pp. 118-119, n. 52, pp. 45-46; and Czu'th, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 16 and
suggests that Merobaudes indicates Visigothic-Bacaudic col- 36-37.
laboration. In support of Thompson, it is noteworthy that Salv. 64 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 119 [Chron. min. 1: p. 660]. The
chronicle does not specify who succeeded in putting down the
De gub. Dei V 22 singles out the Goths as a major barbarian alter-
native to the Bacaudae for the dissident who wished to escape revolt. Borza, "The Bacaudae" (Diss., Chicago, 1962), pp.
Roman oppression. For a parallel case of Visigothic-Bacaudic 42-43, suggests that Sidonius (Carm. VII 246-248) exaggerates
cooperation, cf. Hydat. 141 and 142 [Chron. min. 2: p. 25], as Litorius' role, for he notes that Litorius left Armorica in 436 to
elucidated by Varady, Helikon 2 (1962): pp. 259-263, contra raise a Visigothic siege of Narbo, and the Bacaudic uprising
Szadeczky-Kardoss, ibid. 1 (1961): pp. 148-152. Cf. Czu'th, lasted until 437. But the relief of Narbo probably occurred in
Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 19 and 38-39; and Sz'adeczky- 437 (cf. Loyen, Recherches [Paris, 1942], pp. 45-46), and since
Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 353. Sidonius is not writing a panegyric of Litorius, one can perhaps
take his testimony regarding that commander's achievements at
60 Cf. Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 11-23; Czuth,
Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), passim; Gunther, Zeitschrifl fur face value. But Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins. 85 Eed. de Boor 3: p. 126]
Geschichtswissenschaft 13 (1965): pp. 29-31; Mac Mullen, credits Atius with the suppression of the dissident Armoricanis,
Enemies (Cambridge, 1966), pp. 211-213; Szadeczky-Kardoss, and he probably refers in part to the revolt ending in 437. Cf.
RE Supp. 11 (1968): pp. 346-354; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 16 and 22, n. 23. The
(Diss., Chicago, 1962), pp. 7-11, 38-49. potential conflict between Sidonius and John of Antioch admits
61 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 117 [Chron. min. 1: p. 660]. Cf. of at least two possible solutions. Either Aetius directly put
Sigebertus gemblacensis s.a. 437 [MGH: Scriptores 6: p. 308]; down some of the dissidents in 437, or he took much of the credit
Czu'th, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 15-16, 34-36; and for the campaigns of Litorius and perhaps other subordinates.
Szfdeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 351. Thompson, In general, see Szadeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 351.
Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 11, 16 and 21, n. 1, presents a 66 Cf. Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 344, n. 2; and
widely accepted view that the "servitia" which joined Tibatto Czuth, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 16-17 and 37.
may not have been slaves, but tenant farmers. Cf. Mazzarino, 66 Salv. De gub. Dei V 21-27. Cf. Czuth, Die Quellen (Szeged,
II passaggio (Spoleto, 1962), p. 421; and Mac Mullen, Enemies 1965), pp. 15 and 34-35; and Szadeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp. 11
(Cambridge, 1966), p. 212 and 357, n. 22. For the probable loca- (1968): p. 351.
dissidents divided. But Goar merely aggravated the argued that Constantius' testimony fits the Bacaudic
situation. When he tried to settle his people on the disturbances of the 440's, and that the circumstances
land, the local inhabitants resisted, and the king of the Armorican uprising correspond to Bacaudic
resorted to force. About this time the Armoricans activity in the year 448. Thus the Armoricans
may have attacked Tours, only to be beaten back by rebelled in 448, and Germanus died in the same year.7'
Aetius' lieutenant Majorian.67 A full-scale revolt But the testimony of Merobaudes causes difficulties
was at hand. To meet the threat AMtius ordered for this reconstruction. According to the panegyrist,
Goar to deal severely with the dissidents. At about Armorica was at peace as of 1 January, 446. The
the same time the Armoricans appealed to Germanus, other sources imply that the Armoricans' unrest began
Bishop of Autessiodurum (Auxerre). Goar set out in the early 440's and, with the exception of the brief
with a force of iron-clad cavalry, but Germanus met interruption arranged by Germanus, continually
him on the march and asked him to stop. Goar gathered momentum until it broke out in a full-scale
granted a truce on the condition that Germanus seek revolt. In order to deal with this problem, the de-
pardon for the Armoricans' behavior from Valen- fenders of Levison's chronology suggest that a pre-
tinian III or Atius. Germanus complied and set liminary pacification occurred before 446, but that
out for Italy. After arriving at Ravenna he began to the intercession of Germanus and the major insurrec-
defend the case of the peasants before the Empress tion took place in 448.72 This is possible, but it is
Galla Placidia-Valentinian was in Rome at the equally conceivable that Merobaudes alludes to the
time but the Armoricans themselves undercut his pacification of Armorica around the time of Germanus'
efforts. Perhaps under the leadership of Tibatto death. Recently Thompson and Grosjean have in-
they again revolted, but Roman or allied troops soon vestigated the life of Germanus, and have argued that
crushed their resistance.68 he died on 31 July, 445. Their argument fits the
The source for the intercession of Germanus and evidence better than that of Levison. The revolt of
the rebellion of the Armoricans is the Life of Germanus,
the Armoricans, then, apparently occurred shortly
written around 475-480 by Constantius, a priest of before 31 July, 445. Constantius suggests that it
Lyons. Like many hagiographers, Constantius does did not last long. Merobaudes probably testifies
not present a precise chronology of these events, but that AMtius had a direct or indirect hand in sup-
merely notes that shortly after the outbreak in pressing it before 1 January 446.73
Armorica Germanus died.69 The traditional day for But even with this recent revision of chronology
Germanus' death is 31 July,70 but the year is uncer- the testimony of Merobaudes poses some difficulties.
tain. Until recently the standard analysis of this The poet asserts that with Aetius as consul the
chronological problem was that of Levison. Levison
71 Levison, Neues A rchiv der Gesellschaft fur altere deutsche
67 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 127 [Chron. min. 1: p. 6603.Geschichtskunde
Cf. 29 (1904): pp. 136-141. For the unrest of 448,
Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 66; Stein, Histoire (Paris,cf. Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 133 [Chron. min. 1 p. 662].
1959) 1: p. 331; and Bachrach, Traditio 23 (1967): p. 481. For 72 Cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 331-332 and 580-581,
Majorian's defense of Tours and its apparent date, see above, n. 65; and Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp. 65-66. Levison's
pp. 44-45. article appeared before Vollmer's edition of Merobaudes, and he
68 Vit. Germ. 28-40. Cf. Vit. met. Germ. 120, 158 [PL 124:dated Merobaudes' Panegyric II to 437.
pp. 1183-1184, 12003; and De mir. Germ. 24-25 [ibid., pp. 1218- 7 Thompson, Analecta bollandiana 75 (1957): pp. 135-138;
1219]. Note that Vit. Germ. 40 does not say that Germanus and Grosjean, ibid., pp. 180-185. Cf. Thompson, Antiquity 30
actually obtained pardon, but that he would have if Tibatto had (1956): p. 167; and Thompson, Jour. Roman Studies 46 (1956):
not recalled the Armoricans to revolt. Cf. Griffe, La Gaule p. 71. This new chronology has been accepted by Cz(uth, Die
chretienne (Paris, 1966) 2: pp. 36-37; and Borius, Constance de Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 16-18, 34-35, 37-38; Bachrach,
Lyon (Paris, 1965), p. 197; contra N. Chadwick, Poetry and Traditio 23 (1967): pp. 481-482; Szadeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp.
Letters (London, 1955), pp. 259-262, who interprets this passage 11 (1968): p. 351; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp.
as saying that Germanus did obtain pardon. The role of Tibatto 254-256, 265-266, 279-280. Some students of this problem
in this revolt is questionable. The Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 119 ignore the new date or continue to accept Levison's reconstruc-
[Chron. min. 1: p. 6603 states that Tibatto was captured in 437. tion. Cf. Borius, Constance de Lyon (Paris, 1965), p. 106, et
Either he escaped, or the Vit. Germ. erroneously associated him passim; Griffe, Bulletin de litterature ecclesiastique 66 (1965):
with the later rebellion. Cf. Levison, Neues Archiv der Gesell-p. 289; Meslin, Revue de i'histoire des religions 170 (1966): pp.
schaft f4r dltere deutsche Geschichtskunde 29 (1904): pp. 138-139;205-206; and Meslin and Palanque, Le christianisme antique
Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 16 and 22, n. 23; (Paris, 1967), pp. 283-287. For the duration of the revolt, cf.
Chadwick, Poetry and Letters (London, 1955), pp. 259-262;Vit. Germ. 40: "breui." It is improper to conclude from Merob.
Borius, Constance de Lyon (Paris, 1965), pp. 100-101; Czu'th, DiePaneg. II 8-15 alone that Aetius himself suppressed the Armori-
Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 17-18, 37-38; Meslin and Palanque, cans. Merobaudes would naturally give him the credit even if
Le christianisme antique (Paris, 1967), p. 287, nn. 3-4; Szadeczky-
his lieutenants waged the actual campaigns. But there is other
Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 351; and Oost, Galla Placidia evidence that Aetius was in Gaul in 445. See above, p. 45.
(Chicago, 1968), p. 240, n. 112. For the absence of Valentinian In addition, John of Antioch's statement that Aetius suppressed
from Ravenna at this time, cf. Oost, ibid., pp. 254-256. the rebellion of the Armoricans probably refers not only to the
69 Vit. Germ. 40-42. For Constantius and the date of the disturbances of 435-437, but also to the unrest and insurrection
Vita Germani, cf. Borius, Constance de Lyon (Paris, 1965), pp.
ending in 445. Cf. Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins. 85 Eed. de Boor 3: p.
13-46.
126]; and Thompson, Past and Present 2 (1952): pp. 16 and 22,
70 Cf. Grosjean, Analecta bollandiana 75 (1957): pp. 180-185.
n. 23.
Armoricans are fully under Roman control.74 This nees and the Rhone River. Because the poet men-
claim may conflict with the condition of the Armori- tions the Pyrenees, and because the Bacaudae were
cans in 451, when Attila the Hun invaded Gaul. active in northeastern Spain, it has been argued that
Jordanes enumerates the peoples who assisted Atius this passage refers to more activity of the Bacaudae.80
against the intruder. Most of them are barbarian But this is unlikely. Merobaudes mentions the
tribes and confederations whom the Romans had Pyrenees only as the boundary of "southernmost
accorded the status of foederati, but included in Gaul" (16-17), and this area was not noted for
Jordanes' list are the "Armoricani."75 Jordanes im- Bacaudic disturbances. The most notable enemies
plies that as of 451 the Armoricans had attained such of the Romans in southwestern Gaul were the Visi-
a degree of independence that the Romans were goths. Although Merobaudes does not refer to them
forced to bargain with them as almost an autonomous by name in lines 16-22, he may do so in part in verse
people and perhaps to strike a treaty making them 23.81 The poet does not specify any set battle be-
allies of the Roman state.76 If this occurred before tween Aetius and the Visigoths, but merely remarks
446,77 Merobaudes exaggerates Atius' success in that Atius opened up highways which the enemy
bringing the Armoricans under Roman control. But had seized, returned inhabitants to deserted cities
Merobaudes and Jordanes need not present contradic- and re-established the boundaries of land between
tory testimony. In 448 a physician named Eudoxius, Romans and allies (19-22). This description is so
who had joined the Bacaudae, fled to the Huns. It vague that it could refer to AMtius' Gallic campaigns
is possible that he was attempting to enlist Attila's of 425-ca. 430 or 435-439. During each of these
support against the Romans in Gaul.78 But there is operations Atius or his lieutenants fought in and
no evidence that the Bacaudae supported Attila. around the province of Gallia Narbonensis. 82 But since
Indeed, Jordanes states that they opposed him. If Merobaudes generally refers to Atius' most recent
Eudoxius were contemplating more than escape to successes throughout the first portion of this pane-
Attila, Aetius apparently blocked his moves. But gyric (1-49), it appears that he is alluding to the
if Jordanes indicates that the Armoricans werefoederati fighting between 435 and 439.
or something similar by 451, it would appear that they Perhaps the most notable achievement in south-
were strong enough in the late 440's to force Aetius to western Gaul by Aetius or his subordinates was the
award them a quasi-independent status. On the other liberation of Narbo (Narbonne) from a Visigothic
hand, they sustained a severe defeat in 445, and the siege.83 In 436 the Visigoths, based in the province
panegyrist of Aetius probably presents an accurate of Aquitanica II, which the Romans had assigned them
picture of their position at the beginning of the fol- as foederati, attacked Gallia Narbonensis. Their ulti-
lowing year.79 mate objective was the Mediterranean coast of Gaul,
After discussing the Bacaudae of Armorica, Mero- and under their King Theoderic I they attempted to
baudes turns in verses 16-22 to another important area capture Narbo in order to secure their advance. But
of Gaul: the southwestern corner between the Pyre- in 437 Roman troops relieved the beleaguered city.84
The sources contradict one another as to who was in
74Merob. Paneg. II 13. command when the Romans raised the siege. The
75 Jord. Get. 191; cf. Sidon. Ep. I 7, 5. Jordanes actuallychronicler
uses Prosper states that Aetius' lieutenant
the term "auxiliares" to describe these allies, but for him this
word is similar to foederati. Cf. Mommsen, MGH:AA 5, 1: p.
Litorius led the Roman forces. In a passage of his
181, s.v. "auxiliarii." panegyric to the Western Emperor Avitus (455-456),
Sidonius Apollinaris implies that Litorius' role was
76 Cf. Wirth, Historia 16 (1967): pp. 237-238, n. 46, and p. 249.
77 Wirth, Historia 16 (1967): pp. 237-238, n. 46, and p. 249, crucial.85 But in another portion of the same work
dates their status from ca. 446.
he intimates that Avitus performed the decisive act
78 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 133 [Chron. min. 1: p. 662].
Basically the Gallic chronicler describes one incident caused by
a prominent member of the Bacaudae. Cf. Thompson, Analecta 80 Cf. Hansen, De vita Aetii (Dorpat, 1840), part 2: pp. 12-13,
bollandiana 75 (1957): p. 137; and Borza, "The Bacaudae" n. 116, and 22-25; Czu'th, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 16-17,
(Diss., Chicago, 1962), p. 46. Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain,37; and Szadeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): p. 351.
1961), p. 386, raises the possibility that Eudoxius' purpose was 81 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 11, ad Merob. Paneg. II 23.
to ask Attila for help. Merobaudes generally uses the term Scythicus to apply to the
79 Thompson, Antiquity 30 (1956): p. 167, resolves this problemHuns or the Goths. Cf ibid., p. 309, s.v. "Scythicus." Since he
by suggesting that between 446 and 451 the British aristocracyrefers to the Huns in vss. 1-4, he could mean both peoples in
fled peasant unrest in Britain and settled in Armorica, sub-vs. 23.
jugating the peasants there and making the area once again loyal 82 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 11, ad Merob. Paneg. II 16.
to the Roman government. See also Sz!adeczky-Kardoss, RE 83 Some students associated Merobaudes' testimony with this
Supp. 11 (1968): pp. 350 and 352. But this reconstruction, event. Cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 323 and 578, n. 36;
which by Thompson's admission is tenuous, still fails to accountand Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 344, n. 1.
for the apparently semi-independent status of the Armoricans in 84 For the chronology, cf. Coville, Recherches (Paris, 1928), p.
451. The Armoricans had long desired independence from 107; and Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp. 44-47.
Roman rule. Why would British landowners, who were pre- 85 Prosp. 1324 [Chron. min. 1: p. 475], and Sidon. Carm. VII
sumably loyal to the Roman government, force the goal of 246-248, as elucidated by Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp.
Armorican peasants on the imperial authorities? 45-46.
and persuaded Theoderic to withdraw.86 On the from the North. But now the attacker has removed
other hand, if Merobaudes refers to the relief of the garb of an enemy and has become eager to seal
Narbo, it would appear that Aetius was on hand for the pact of friendship with the Romans through a
this event. The chronicler Hydatius offers no help marriage. Obviously the occupier of Libya (24) is
here, for he merely notes that Narbo was liberated.87 Geiseric. The seat of Dido's kingdom (25) is Car-
This problem admits of a simple solution. Prosper thage, which Geiseric captured and garrisoned with a
is correct in crediting Litorius with the deliverance of multitude from the North-the Vandals (25-26). In
the city. Since Sidonius is panegyrizing Avitus, he using the phrase "fated arms" (24) Merobaudes
diminishes the role of Litorius and portrays that of probably voices an attitude of fatalism which was
Avitus as decisive. Perhaps the latter did perform a current in the fifth century. He is saying, in effect,
diplomatic act of secondary importance.88 Mero- that the Vandal attack on Carthage may be a sign of
baudes does not specifically mention that Aetius impending doom for the Roman Empire.92 But at
relieved Narbo, but notes operations through which present, he asserts, all is well. Geiseric has reached
Atius opened up the general vicinity of Narbo.A9 an accord with the Empire (27-29).93
Such activity could have occurred anytime during the In his poetic fashion Merobaudes confirms and adds
campaign of 435-439. Perhaps the poet alludes to to what other sources relate. In 429 Geiseric led his
the closing stages of Aetius' latest war with the
Visigoths.90 If he refers also to the liberation of 92 For Merobaudes' use of Vergilian imagery, compare, for
Narbo, he credits Aetius with the successes of his example, Paneg. II 26 and Verg. Aen. I 20. The Vergilian meta-
subordinates. phor occurs in a similar context in Sidon. Carm. II 348-351, V
88-89, and VII 441-451. Morosi, L'invito di Eudossia a Genserico
In verses 1-22, then, Merobaudes describes Aetius'
(Florence, 1882), p. 43, n. 3, suggests that Merobaudes and
victories along Rome's northern frontier and in the Sidonius mirror contemporary fatalism. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari,
important area of Gaul. In line 23 he terminates 1953), p. 18, sees Merobaudes' phrase as pure determinism:
his discussion of the territory north of Italy and Geiseric used arms which Rome as the destroyer of Carthage
(146 B.C.) provoked on herself and could not avoid. Courcelle,
begins a transition to another region. There is a
Revue des e'tudes latines 32 (1954): p. 451, rejects this interpreta-
lacuna in the text here, but apparently the poet states tion. Morosi's exegesis hinges on the meaning of the adjective
that after Rome was rescued from the barbarian "fatalibus" (Merob. Paneg. II 24). The word may simply mean
threat originating in the North, she found a new enemy "deadly" or "destructive," but since Sidonius adopts a fatalistic
to the South.9' Certainly when the manuscript re- attitude toward the Vandals, I am inclined to think, with Morosi,
that Merobaudes anticipated him. Thus "fatalibus" seemingly
sumes at verse 24 Merobaudes is speaking of a new
means "fated." Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 182,
adversary. His poetic imagery is ornate, but there adopts this interpretation.
is no doubt that he refers in lines 24-29 to the Vandal " Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 15-16, renders the entire
King Geiseric, his possession of a kingdom based on passage as follows: "Gia ogni parte era stata sottrata al furore
degli Sciti, il nemico . . . L'occupatore della Libia, quantunque
Carthage, and the ratification of his status through a
avesse osato con armi fornite a lui dal destino di dividere da Roma
treaty with the Empire. In order to depict these il soglio del regno di Elyssa, aveva riempito con le migliaia di
circumstances Merobaudes uses Vergilian metaphors. soldati nordici le rocche Tirie. Ma adesso, rinunziando alla sua
The occupier of Libya, he says, had fated arms on his inimicizia, ha bramato di legarsi con patti piiu appropriati la
side when he dared to tear down the throne of Dido's romana fede, di poter annoverare tra la sua discendenza una
parentela latina e di assicurarsi una prole che potesse aspirare
kingdom and filled the Tyrian fortresses with hordes
all' alleanza con questa razza." There are at least three flaws to
this interpretation: (1) "Quamvis" (24) may mean "although,"
86 Sidon. Carm. VII 475-480. Cf. Griffe, La Gaule chretienne but it is nonsense to regard "ausus . . . rescindere" (25) as an
(Paris, 1966) 2: p. 31, n. 2. adversative clause subordinate to the main clause whose verb is
87Without punctuation, Hydat. 110 [Chron. min. 2: p. 23] "compleverat" (26). The sense of the first clause actually
reads as follows: "Narbona obsidione liberatur Aetio duce et supports rather than opposes that of the second. If one inter-
magistro militum Burgundionum caesa XX millia." Mommsen prets "quamvis" as an adversative conjunction, the verb with
(ad loc.) inserts a period after "militum." By this interpretationwhich it is connected is "compleverat," and the sense of vss.
Aetius relieved Narbo. But Coville, Recherches (Paris, 1928), 24-29 is as follows: Although Geiseric had dared to attack
p. 107, notes that Fredegar. II 51, who paraphrases Hydatius' Carthage, he now desired to conclude a treaty. Such an interpre-
passage, credits Aetius with the slaughter of the Burgundians. tation of course necessitates placing a comma rather than a
Thus it appears that a period belongs after "liberatur." period at the end of vs. 26. I prefer to retain Vollmer's punctua-
88 Cf. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp. 46-47. tion here, and to regard "quamvis" as an intensive adverb
89 Merob. Paneg. II 19-22. Sidon. Carm. VII 246-248 implies meaning "exceedingly" and qualifying "fatalibus" (24). For
that Litorius had to proceed from Armorica to Narbo by way ofthis usage see Merob. Paneg. II 176; Vollmer, MGH:AA 14:
the territory of the Arverni. Loyen, Recherches (Paris, 1942), p. 398, s.v. "quamvis"; and C. T. Lewis and C. Short, A Latin
p. 46, suggests that the Visigoths had closed off the more direct Dictionary (Oxford, 1962), s.v. "quamvis." (2) Gitti reads into
routes through Aquitanica II. Merobaudes too much of the treaty between Geiseric and Rome
90 See below, pp. 58-59. when he takes "rescindere" (25) to mean the setting aside of a
91 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 11, ad Merob. Paneg. II 23. portion of Africa from the Roman state. Courcelle, Revue des
But "Scythicis" probably indicates the general barbarian threat etudes latines 32 (1954): p. 451, gives a more accurate rendering of
discussed in vss. 1-22, rather than merely the Goths, as Vollmer this verb: "couper en deux." (3) Gitti's interpretation of vs. 29
suggests, or the Huns (cf. Hansen, De vita Aetii [Dorpat, 1840], is not a translation, but a paraphrase based on what is generally
part 2: p. 25, n. 145). known about Geiseric's treaty with Rome.
people from southern Spain to North Africa. By mation M\Ierobaudes conveys does not appear in the
435 he was powerful enough to secure a treaty from other evidence for the accord. The other Latin
Valentinian III recognizing him as a foederatus and sources indicate merely that Valentinian and Geiseric
awarding him a portion of North Africa which centered exchanged territory in North Africa. The former
on the province of Numidia.94 On 19 October, 439, took control of western Numidia, Mauretania Cae-
Geiseric broke the treaty and captured Carthage by sariensis and Sitifensis-the region's poorer portions.
surprise.95 At the time, Carthage was the heart of The latter laid claim to Africa Proconsularis, Byza-
North Africa, Rome's most important granary.96 cene, and eastern Numidia-all comprising the rich
The Empire would surely try to recover this key city, hinterland of Carthage.99 The Greek versions of this
and to avoid a counterattack Geiseric took the offen- treaty ignore the territorial clause and present a
sive immediately. In 440 he launched a devastating confused or fanciful picture of the agreement. A
naval raid on Sicily, and at least threatened Italy and tradition apparently based on the fifth-century his-
Sardinia. He may also have struck at various points torian Priscus asserts that Geiseric concluded a pact
in the eastern Mediterranean.97 Towards the end of around 441/2 with Theodosius II. This may be an
440 he stopped his attacks and withdrew to Carthage, Eastern view of the accord between Valentinian and
apparently in apprehension of an imperial counter- Geiseric, but it is more likely that it is a distortion
offensive. AMtius had returned from his campaigns of a diplomatic exchange between Geiseric and Flavius
in Gaul, and the Eastern Emperor Theodosius II was Ardabur Aspar, an Eastern general who waged an
sending a relief expedition to the West. The fleet ineffective campaign against Geiseric in North Africa
put into Sicily in 441, but it delayed its offensive between 431 and 434.100 Procopius of Caesarea, a
against the Vandals. Before it accomplished any- historian who flourished in the sixth century, affords
thing, the Huns and other barbarians overran parts a confused version of the pact. He was seemingly
of the East. To meet this new threat the Eastern aware of Priscus' account, but corrected it to read that
task force left Sicily for home in 442, abandoning the Geiseric reached an agreement with Valentinian.'0'
West to new assaults from the Vandals. In the Procopius thus aligns himself with the Latin sources
same year Valentinian III concluded a treaty with on this point, but the remaining portion of his testi-
Geiseric.98 mony seems to be a conflation of the Vandal-Roman
There can be little doubt that Merobaudes refers treaties of 435 and 442. Procopius places his dis-
in his verse panegyric to the treaty of 442 and its cussion of a pact in the context of Aspar's withdrawal
ramifications. In line 27 he speaks of "pacts," and from Africa, which occurred in 434, and which caused
goes on to state that Geiseric desires to link his house Valentinian to negotiate with Geiseric in 435. In
with that of Valentinian by marriage (27-29). This
99Prosp. 1347 [Chron. min. 1: p. 479]; and Vict. Vit. 1 13.
desire probably grew from the treaty. But the infor-
Cf. Courtois, Les Vandales (Paris, 1955), pp. 173-175; Braun,
Revue africaine 103 (1959): pp. 114-116; Desanges, Byzantion
94 Cf. Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 76-84; and Courtois, 33(1963): pp. 41-69; and Clover, "Geiseric" (Diss., Chicago,
Les Vandales (Paris, 1955), pp. 155-171. 1966), pp. 88-89. Merob. Carm. I 9 apparently refers to this
95 Prosp. 1339 [Chron. min. 1: p. 477]; Hydat. 115 [ibid. 2: exchange. See above, p. 21.
p. 23]; Adnot. ad cyclos dionys. s.a. 439 [ibid. 1: p. 755]; and 100Theophan. 5941, 5942 Eed. de Boor 1: pp. 101-102]; and
Laterc. reg. Wand. s.a. 439 [ibid. 3: p. 458]. Cf. Courtois, Les Niceph. XIV 57 [PG 146: p. 1269]. Nicephorus draws partly
Vandales (Paris, 1955), p. 171, n. 4. Merobaudes alludes to on Theophanes here, and one of Theophanes' sources is Priscus.
this, and only this, event in vss. 24-26. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, Cf. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica (Berlin, 1958) 1: p. 486; and
1953), pp. 15-16, et passim, continually attempts to read the Gentz and Winkelmann, Die Kirchengeschichte des Nicephorus
terms of the subsequent treaty into this passage. This is evident (Berlin, 1966), p. 142. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6:
in his interpretation of "rescindere" in vs. 25 (see above, n. 93). pp. 120-121 and 421, advances the standard interpretation that
But Merobaudes does not begin to speak of a treaty until vs. 27, Theophanes and Nicephorus give the Eastern version of the
and then he uses the perfect tense. He casts the previous treaty of 442. For this tradition as a distortion of diplomatic
sentence (24-26) in the pluperfect, thereby indicating action prior contact between Aspar and Geiseric, cf. Clover, "Geiseric" (Diss.,
to the treaty. Gitti's rendition stems from the erroneous as- Chicago, 1966), pp. 41-53, 83-87, and 92.
sumption that the marriage arrangements which Merobaudes de- 101 Procop. Bell. Vand. I 4, 13 asserts that Geiseric was afraid
scribes in vss. 27-29 occurred three years after the treaty. See that the Empire would send another expedition against him, and
below, p. 54. thus reached an agreement with Valentinian. Theoph. 5941 Eed.
96 Cf. Salv. De gub. Dei VI 68; and Courtois, Les Vandales de Boor 1: p. 101] and Niceph. XIV 57 [PG 146: p. 1269] use
(Paris, 1955), pp. 211-212. the same language to ascribe the same motivation for the treaty
97 Cf. Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 86-89; Courtois, Les between Theodosius and Geiseric. Now the latter version ap-
Vandales (Paris, 1955), pp. 187, 190-191; Giunta, Genserico e la parently derives from Priscus (see above), and in the relevant
Sicilia (Palermo, 1958), pp. 45-56; P. Meloni, L'amministrazione chapter of his history Procopius drew partly on Priscus. Cf. B.
della Sardegna (Rome, 1958), pp. 175-177; and Clover, "Geiseric Rubin, "Prokopios von Kaisareia," RE 23 (1957): pp. 273-599,
the Statesman" (Diss., Chicago, 1966), pp. 68-78. at pp. 404-405; and Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica (Berlin, 1958)
98 Prosp. 1342, 1344, 1346, 1347 [Chiron. min. 1: pp. 478-479]. 1: p. 486. Thus it appears that Procopius knew of Priscus'
Cf. Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 88-89; Stein, Histoire testimony, but on the basis of other evidence he sought politely
(Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 291-292, 324-325; Courtois, Les Vandales to correct Priscus by phrasing his own account in a manner which
(Paris, 1955), pp. 172-173; and Clover, "Geiseric" (Diss., echoed that of Priscus. Cf. Clover, "Geiseric" (Diss., Chicago,
Chicago, 1966), pp. 78-88. 1966), p. 91.
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 19711 COMMENTARY 53
accordance with the treaty, says the historian of But it is Merobaudes who makes Procopius' testi-
Caesarea, Geiseric agreed to pay annual tribute, and mony relevant to the treaty of 442. In his verses on
ratified the agreement by sending Huniric, one of his the family of Valentinian, written ca. 443, the poet
sons, as a hostage to the emperor.102 apparently takes note of Huniric as an "exile" at the
The testimony of M\lerobaudes ultimately illumi- court of Ravenna.'09 But why would Geiseric con-
nates that of Procopius. The treaty of 435 affirmed sent to the surrender of his son as a hostage when he
that Geiseric was a foederatus of the Empire, and gave held the advantage in the negotiations of 442 ?110
him the territory between western Africa Proconsularis Again Merobaudes furnishes the answer: Valentinian
and eastern Mauretania Sitifensis in which to settle.'03 agreed to betroth Huniric to his daughter Eudocia.'"I
The fact that the Vandals became foederati makes Geiseric had ample reason to send his son to Ravenna
questionable the relevance of Procopius' testimony to as a hostage. In his panegyric of 446 Merobaudes
the accord of 435. In a federate-type treaty it was sums up the state of affairs which the treaty of 442
usually the imperial government which paid a kind of established. Geiseric looks forward to a closer bond
tribute, the annonae foederaticae, to the barbarians. of friendship through the marriage of Eudocia and
Procopius states the opposite.104 In addition, German Huniric.112
foederati regularly ratified a treaty by giving hostages Merobaudes may shed light on another aspect of
only when the Romans had the upper hand. The the agreement of 442. The sources are not specific
Vandals had the advantage in the pact of 435.105 regarding the legal status which the Empire awarded
Finally, Procopius is unaware that Geiseric concluded the Vandals. Prosper's cryptic description of the
treaties with Valentinian in 435 and 442. One widely pact shows only that the barbarians abandoned their
held opinion is that Procopius placed the treaty of 442 former standing as foederati.113 It may indicate that
in the wrong chronological context.'06 But this from the Roman point of view the Vandals assumed a
explanation is not quite satisfactory. The treaty of position of de facto independence from the Roman
435 need not have conformed to general diplomatic Empire. But it is doubtful that the Romans legally
usage. Perhaps Procopius conveys in distorted fash- recognized Geiseric and his followers as a sovereign
ion one or two gestures by Geiseric to help the Romans people."14 Merobaudes perhaps gives the key to their
save face.'07 The current opinion regarding Proco- juridical position when he uses the adjective socius
pius' testimony can only stand if one examines each to indicate the future marriage of Huniric and
of Procopius' terms in the context of the treaty of 442.Eudocia. The word has a double meaning. It de-
Procopius' assertion that Geiseric paid yearly notes an alliance of marriage by virtue of a political
tribute to Valentinian fits the early 440's better than alliance. This adjective and other tenuous evidence
the middle 430's. In 435 the Romans still controlled
Carthage, Sicily, and Sardinia-the chief granaries Les Vandales (Paris, 1955), p. 173, n. 10; Diesner, Das Vandal-
of the West. In 439 they lost Carthage, and in the enreich (Stuttgart, 1966), p. 57; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago,
1968), p. 261.
following year Geiseric devastated Sicily. It is con- 109 Merob. Carm. I 7-8. See above, pp. 20-21.
ceivable that in 442 the West asked for shipments of 110 Taking this into consideration, Schmidt, Histoire (Paris,
surplus grain from Africa Proconsularis and Byzacene. 1953), pp. 82-83, objects to assigning Procopius' testimony to the
Geiseric, aware that the plight of the West might pact of 442. Diesner, Das Vandalenreich (Stuttgart, 1966), p. 57,
provoke further attempts to recover Carthage, may maintains that the surrender of Huniric did not imply a diminu-
tion of Geiseric's authority, but merely a ratification of the treaty.
have agreed to this. Procopius' use of the word "I Merob. Carm. I 17-18; 11 13-14. See above, pp. 23-24, 28.
"tribute" may indicate the official designation of 112 Merob. Paneg. II 27-29.
such exportation. Geiseric was probably willing to 113 Prosp. 1347 [Chron. min. 1: p. 479], as elucidated by
let the West save face.'08 Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 82 and 89.
114 There is a general tendency to regard the Vandal kingdom
as independent and sovereign by virtue of the pact of 442. See,
102 Procop. Bell. Vand. I 4, 12-13.
for example, Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: p. 325; Courtois, Les
103 Prosp. 1321 [Chron. min. 1: p. 474]. Cf. Schmidt, Histoire Vandales (Paris, 1955), p. 173; Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain,
(Paris, 1953), pp. 82-84; and Courtois, Les Vandales (Paris, 1961), p. 296; and Diesner, Das Vandalenreich (Stuttgart, 1966),
1955), pp. 169-170.
p. 57. This is unlikely. The edicts of Valentinian III during
104 Cf. Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), p. 83; and I. Masur,
the period 442-455 show that the emperor still regarded the
"Die Vertrage" (Diss., Berlin, 1952), no. 140, p. 85, n. 1. provinces of Africa Proconsularis and Byzacene as legal entities,
101 Cf. Masur, Die Vertrdge (Diss., Berlin, 1952), p. 85, n.and
1, and
interpreted the Vandal presence there as temporary. See
194-200.
especially Nov. Val. XII and XXXIV; and Romanelli, Storia
106 See, for example, Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) (Rome,
6: pp. 1959), p. 661. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), p. 16, stops
121 and 421; Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1958) 1: pp. 325 andshort 578, of asserting that the Romans renounced all sovereignty
n. 49; Courtois, Les Vandales (Paris, 1955), pp. 169, n. 7, and over the territory under Vandal control. Morazzini, Bulletin de
395-396; Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 25-31; and Oost, Galla l'Association Guillaume Bude, ser. 4, 4 (1966): pp. 539-561, at
Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 260.
p. 549, gives perhaps the best assessment of the problem: Al-
107 Cf. Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 82-83; Sirago, Galla
though he took possession of Carthage and its hinterland,
Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 293; and H.-J. Diesner, Der Unter-
Geiseric recognized Valentinian as emperor, and his kingdom
gang (Weimar, 1964), p. 186.
continued to be legally a part of the Empire. For a similar
108 Cf. Bury, History (London, 1923) 1: pp. 256-257; Courtois,
analysis, see Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 263.
suggest that the Empire bestowed on Geiseric the The betrothal of Huniric and Eudocia is the most
ancient status of socius et amicus cum foedere."15 curious result of the pact of 442. There are no indi-
There is one further problem which Merobaudes' cations that before that date either Valentinian or
testimony evokes: What role did Atius play in the Geiseric were interested in associating their houses.
accord of 442? The panegyrist mentions the agree- Once again Merobaudes sheds some light on this
ment and its ramifications in commending tones, and matter. In his poems of ca. 443-works carefully
some critics see in this an indication that Aetius had attuned to the current attitudes of the imperial
a direct hand in the negotiations."6 Now Aetius family-he mentions the future wedding of Eudocia
returned to Italy from Gaul by late summer 440. It and Huniric in approving tones.'2' In his verse pane-
is conceivable that he participated in the defense of gyric to Aetius he remarks that, after capturing
Italy and the diplomatic activity which resulted in Carthage, Geiseric suddenly shed his hostility and
the exchange of territory in 442.1"7 But it is unlikely became eager to join himself to the Roman cause.'22
that he helped arrange the betrothal of Eudocia and While this latter statement smacks of the Roman
Huniric. Such an important step was the concern concept of a barbarian restitutor orbis, it is not incon-
of the imperial family. This marriage would allow ceivable that Geiseric was enthusiastic about joining
Geiseric to influence the imperial succession. Around the House of Theodosius.'23 In short, even if one
454 Aetius engaged his son Gaudentius to Valen- allows for the exaggeration of a court poet, it is likely
tinian's younger daughter Placidia, thereby indicating that Merobaudes has conveyed the satisfaction of
his own ambitions for the emperor's house. The both sides regarding the betrothal. That Geiseric
betrothal of Eudocia and Huniric was a threat to was pleased is understandable. Barbarians of late
him then, and it was probably a threat in the early antiquity were generally unable to resist the prospect
440's.18 The treaty of 442 may have required of a connection with an imperial family. The ap-
Geiseric to surrender his son as a hostage, but it need proval of Valentinian is equally comprehensible.
not have stipulated that Huniric become Eudocia's Geiseric furnished the means of offsetting the influence
betrothed. Indeed, most critics maintain that the of AMtius, one of the most powerful men in the West.
engagement was a separate arrangement.119 Probably The fact that Merobaudes commends the betrothal in
it occurred in conjunction with the accord.'20 a panegyric to Aetius need not signify the general's
own approbation. It would be impolitic for him to
115 Merob. Paneg. II 29. In other extant passages Merobaudes
express his displeasure publicly.124
uses socius to indicate various types of alliance. Cf. Carm. II 9;
Carm. IV 15; Paneg. II 22, 36, 44, 172. For a similar usage, cf. With his discussion of the Vandals, Merobaudes
Oros. VII 41, 7. Procop. Bell. Vand. I 4, 39 furnishes additional terminates the detailed enumeration of the barbarians
evidence bearing directly on the treaty of 442. In recounting the and dissidents conquered by Aetius. In verses 30-49
Empress Eudoxia's appeal to Geiseric following the assassination
he recapitulates Aetius' successes: The "polar region
of her husband Valentinian (16 March, 455), Procopius says that
Eudoxia beseeched Geiseric "as a friend and ally." While Mero- of Scythia"-roughly the entire barbarian world-
baudes and Procopius may be describing de facto independence in has been overcome (33-34).125 And he describes a
traditional terms, it is still possible that they convey something
of the Vandals' legal position as of 442. (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: pp. 122, 422; Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1:
116 Cf. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 18-23; and Sirago, Galla pp. 326 and 579, n. 52; Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 13-31;
Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 300. Courtois, Les Vandales (Paris, 1955), p. 395; Sirago, Galla
117 For the chronology of Aetius' return to Italy, see above, Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 299; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok
p. 29. There is tenuous evidence that Atius did figure in 13 (1966): p. 182, n. 48. Seeck expresses the generally accepted
these events. The inscription honoring Aetius which dates view, based on the date of Merobaudes' Panegyric II, that the
from ca. 440-446, states that Aetius guaranteed the security of betrothal took place in 445. But Merob. Carm. I 7-8, 17-18
Italy from afar by overwhelming the Goths, Burgundians, and and Carm. II 13-14 show that the engagement was in effect ca.
other "gentes." Cf. L'Annee epigraphique 1950: no. 30. The 443. See above, pp. 20-21, 23-24, 28.
Senate may simply have noted Aetius' Gallic campaigns, but it 120 Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 60 (1965): p. 6.
is also possible that it numbered the Vandals among the other 121 Merob. Carm. I 17-18, Carm. II 13-14. See above, pp.
peoples. According to Joh. Ant. Exc. de ins. 85 [ed. de Boor 3: pp. 23-24, 28.
p. 127], Geiseric attacked Rome in 455 on the grounds that the 122 Merob. Paneg. II 24-29.
treaty (of 442) "was dissolved by the death of those who con- 123 For the concept, see esp. Oros. VII 43, 4-7, where the
cluded it," i.e. Valentinian and Aetius. This allegation is propa- Visigothic King Athaulf waxes enthusiastic over the prospect
ganda, and indicates that as of 455 Geiseric wanted to represent of becoming a "Romanae restitutionis auctor," after failing as
Aetius as one of the negotiators of the accord of 442. Cf. Clover, an "immutator." In this case Orosius is probably conveying
"Geiseric" (Diss., Chicago, 1966), pp. 147-150. But Geiseric an actual speech by Athaulf, although the idea expressed was
may have based his assertion on fact. In general, see Oost, common in Roman literature. Cf. Oost, Classical Philology 63
Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), p. 262. (1968): pp. 114-121; Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp.
118 For the engagement of Gaudentius and Placidia, see above, 124-125; and, in general, Corsini, Introduzione (Turin, 1968), pp.
pp. 29-30. For the conflicting interests of Atius and Geiseric, 178-191. The same observation may apply to Geiseric as seen
cf. Clover, "Geiseric" (Diss., Chicago, 1966), pp. 101-102, 106- through Merobaudes' eyes.
110, 129-133; and Oost, Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp. 124 Cf. Gitti, Ricerche (Bari, 1953), pp. 44-45, 49-50; and Oost,
262-263. Galla Placidia (Chicago, 1968), pp. 238-239, 264, n. 55.
119 Cf. Schmidt, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 12 (1903): pp. 601- 125 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 309, s.v. "Scythicus," interprets
603; Schmidt, Histoire (Paris, 1953), pp. 95-96; Seeck, Geschichte Merob. Paneg. II 33-34 as a reference to the Goths. But in the
VOL. 61, PT. 1,1971] COMMENTARY 55
victory procession of Atius through Rome in language all these trappings and rewards. One wonders if
reminiscent of a triumph. It is certain that Aetius anything can equal the deeds of this man (47-49).127
did not celebrate an actual triumph. High-ranking A sizable lacuna occurs in the text after line 49,
generals ceased to receive that distinction by the and the next two fragments of the panegyric (50-97)
first century A.D., and thereafter the emperor retained show that Merobaudes shifts a central portion of his
the exclusive right to it. But in the first century work from the level of human affairs to that of the
B.C. the Romans had begun to separate the trappings gods. A baneful goddess (69)-perhaps one of the
of a triumphator from the triumph itself and associate Furies-complains that instead of herself the gods
them with other events not necessarily reserved for of peace are worshiped, certainly as a result of Aetius'
the emperor. By the middle of the second century victories (50-53). She vows to rectify the situation
A.D. one such occasion made its appearance. On by calling forth barbarians from the Black Sea to
1 January the new consuls assumed triumphal dress break treaties and attack Rome (53-58).128 She
and conducted a processus consularis, a festive proces- journeys to the legendary Rhiphaean Mountains, the
sion to the Capitoline Hill. The practice was still very heartland of the barbarians who she hopes will
current in late antiquity. Merobaudes depicts such attack Rome (59-60). There she arouses another
an occasion. Aetius wears triumphal attire (32) despondent war goddess, probably Enyo, to be her
as he marches through Rome displaying his consular ally in stirring up trouble (61-73). A short lacuna
axes (34). Mars does not obstruct this celebration after verse 73 scarcely interrupts the train of thought.
(36). Victory carries Aetius on the consul's curule The Huns are to be the special agents of these deities
chair (44). The fasces attend him as he retraces the for the destruction of Latium (74-85).129 But to start
"lofty steps of triumphs"-the steep road up the a war between barbarians and Romans is only half
Capitoline (45-46). In all probability Merobaudes the task. The evil goddesses must do away with the
represents Aetius' processus consularis on 1 January, worship of good divinities, and human life must at-
446.126 Naturally, says the poet, Atius outshines tain a state of turmoil (86-97). In introducing an
previous verses the poet enumerates other barbarians such as the encounter between two deities, Merobaudes adopts a
Huns, Franks, and perhaps Burgundians. All of these people feature of the poetic panegyric which his predecessor
inhabited the "polar region of Scythia." It seems better, then, Claudian liberally used: the concilium deorum.130
to regard the adjective Scythicus as meaning "barbarian" in the Perhaps the most pertinent parallel in Claudian's
present case.
126 For the history of the triumph during the Empire, cf. W.
works appears in the first book of his attack on the
Ehlers, s.v. "Triumphus" (1), RE 7A, 1 (1939): pp. 493-511, at Eastern minister Rufinus. There the Fury Allecto
499-501. For the processus consularis, see ibid., p. 501, and summons her infernal associates for an attack on the
Kuibler, s.v. "Consul," RE 4 (1901): pp. ;1 12-1138, at 1125-1126. peace of the world.'3' Since councils of the gods
Olybrius and Probinus, consuls for 395, conducted this procession
in Rome, as did Belisarius at Constantinople in 535. Cf. Claud. manyok 13 (1966): p. 182, n. 50. In other processus consulares
I 230-233; Procop. Bell. Vand. II 9, 15. Merobaudes' depiction of late antiquity, however, the consuls displayed their axes. Cf.
fits the general pattern outlined by Ehlers and Kubler. Olajos, Claud. I 232, XXVIII 647. Perhaps Merobaudes uses the ad-
Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 182, n. 51, interprets these jective arcanus to mean "hallowed" or "venerable."
verses as a reference to the festivities at the beginning of Aetius' 127 Hansen, De vita ANtii (Dorpat, 1840), part 2: pp. 53-54,
consular year. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 12, ad Merob. Paneg. attempts to see in Merob. Paneg. II 45-49 a reference to Aetius'
II 30, suggests less convincingly that they indicate Aetius' return ambitions for the imperial succession, which are evident by 454.
to Rome from Gaul in 440. Within the framework of the Cf. Prosp. 1373 [Chron. min. 1: p. 483]. But here Merobaudes
processus consularis, two points of Merobaudes' description are merely presents a series of rhetorical sententiae, as he does, for
noteworthy: (1) Although Merobaudes (Paneg. II 45-46) suggests example, in Paneg. I frg. IIA 7-20. Cf. L. K. Born, Amer. Jour.
that Aetius wound his way up the Capitoline Hill, it seems un- Philology 55 (1934): pp. 30-31.
likely that, in keeping with tradition, he would enter the temple 128 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 13, ad Merob. Paneg. II 50.
of Jupiter Capitolinus to do thankful obeisance. Such behavior Vollmer (p. 10) tentatively identifies the "diva nocens" of vs. 69
would be unbecoming of the chief general of the most Christian with the Fury Teisiphone.
Emperor Valentinian III. Some triumphs of Christian Emperors 129 In vss. 55-56 and 75-76 Merobaudes clearly speaks of the.
seem not to have progressed past the Forum. Cf. Amm. Marc. region of the Black Sea and the Don River. Thus the barbarians
XVI 10, 1-17 (Constantius II in 357) and Claud. XXVIII 543- referred to are the Huns. Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 309, s.v.
660 (Honorius celebrating his consulate of 404). Claud. I 232 "Scythicus." Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 183, n.
suggests that Olybrius and Probinus only proceeded as far as the 57, ignores Merobaudes' uniform geography and interprets the
Forum during their consular procession. Nevertheless, Claud. fluvial imagery of vs. 56 as a reference to the seafaring Vandals.
XXVIII 369-383, recounting Honorius' triumph over Count 130 Cf. Hammond, Studies in Philology 30 (1933): pp. 1-16.
Gildo in 398, notes that models illustrating the war against Gildo Naturally Merobaudes derives some of his imagery from other
were prepared "to be seen by Tarpeian Jove"-that is, Jupiter poets. Lines 87-88, for example, are reminiscent of Stat. Silv.
Capitolinus. Unless Claudian and Merobaudes merely use tradi- II 6, 86-87 and III 3, 34-35. See also Vollmer, MGH:AA 14:
tional imagery, they probably indicate that Honorius in 398 and p. 14, ad vss. 91 and 97.
Aetius in 446 made their way up the Capitoline Hill. But the "I Claud. III 25-122. Cf. Heimsoeth, Rheinisches Museum
emperor and the general need not have entered the temple of fur Philologie, ser. 2, 2 (1843): p. 536. For other examples of
Jupiter there. (2) The phrase "arcanis . . . securibus" (Merob. concilia deorum in Claudian, cf. Claud. XV 17-212, XXII 208-
Paneg. II 34) is curious. At first glance it appears that Aetius 268, XXXVI 1-65, XXXVII 42-59. Merobaudes' successor
removed his consular axes from the fasces-that is, kept them Sidonius used the same device. Cf. Sidon. Carm. VII passim. In
"concealed"-as a symbol of peace. Cf. Olajos, Antik Tanul- most of these assemblies there are more than two participants, but
formed a regular part of the poetic panegyric of A short gap occurs in the manuscript at verse 120.
Merobaudes' day, there is little use in attempting to In the intervening space Merobaudes apparently
see in the threats of a malicious goddess a reference finishes his discussion of Atius' parentage and passes
to specific events.'32 on to Atius himself. Naturally the poet starts
Again a large lacuna interrupts the text of Mero- with Aetius as an infant (121-122).139 Despite the
baudes' poem, this time at verse 97. When the fact that he could scarcely walk, the future general
manuscript resumes at line 98 the poet has returned had already started fashioning implements of war
to the plane of human affairs. Someone prays for a from ice (121-126). Merobaudes' description of the
man to provide stern yet just leadership in war world of snow and ice where AMtius trained for war
(98-104). At the end of the prayer there is no as an infant fits more specific information from other
doubt that only one person fits this ideal: Aetius sources. Aetius was born ca. 391 in Durostorum,
(104-110).1'3 It would appear that in the lost por- a city in Moesia Inferior.'40 Thus the poet probably
tion of the text the war goddesses are successful in refers to Aetius' childhood in that region.'4' He
ending the peace. Thus it becomes necessary to ask depicts the area in a manner faintly reminiscent of
Atius to command in war again.'34 Ovid, who spent his last years in exile at Tomis.'42
As the citizens begin to deliberate on the merits of AMtius' early training came at the right moment,
Aetius (106-110), Merobaudes seizes the opportunity says Merobaudes, for soon the Visigoths were pressing
to insert a praise-filled account of Aetius' background on Rome (127-128).'43 But AMtius stopped them by
(110-143). In lines 110-120 he dwells on Aetius' becoming a hostage, just as he recently stopped them
father Gaudentius. Gaudentius was a native of the by defeating them in war (129-133).'44 In his birth-
province of Scythia. He began a military career in day poem to AMtius' son, Merobaudes makes clear
the West as domesticus.'35 As comes Africae he and why AMtius' captivity immediately followed his in-
his colleague Jovius destroyed pagan temples in fancy: He was a hostage just after he reached pu-
Carthage on 19 M\arch, 399.136 Sometime after 21 berty.'45 As a captive AMtius amazed the Goths
March, 399, Gaudentius attained the rank of magister (133-134). Their king was also impressed, and in-
equitum.'37 Shortly after he assumed this high com- creased the boy's knowledge of warfare-to the future
mand, and probably before the end of 407, he com- detriment of the barbarians (134-143).
manded troops in Gaul. But perhaps because of There can be no doubt that the Gothic king to whom
rigid discipline his soldiers mutinied and killed him. Merobaudes refers is Alaric. The fifth-century his-
Merobaudes suggests that he fell prey to a soldier or torian Frigeridus also mentions AMtius' internment,
subordinate officer who pretended to present him a and specifies that Alaric was king at the time.'46 But
request.'38 in order to determine when AMtius became a hostage
among the Visigoths, it is necessary first to emphasize
Claud. XXVI II 146-177 notes a brief exchange between Eridanus
certain aspects of the testimony of Merobaudes and
and one of the Naiads.
132 Hansen, De vita Aetii (Dorpat, 1840), part 2: pp. 7-9, 26-2 7, Frigeridus. Merobaudes states that Aetius became
sees a reference to the civil strife between Aetius and Count Alaric's captive as a result of a treaty-obviously
Boniface in 432. between the Visigothic king and the Romans. The
133 "In dubium" of vs. 105 may be taken adverbally. Cf. poet suggests that the peace occurred when Alaric
Thesaurus linguae latinae 5, 1 (1909-1934): p. 2120, s.v.
"dubius." Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 342, s.v. "dubius," takes both take the Gaudentius who was vicarius Africae as of 29
"dubium" to be masculine. April, 409 (Cod. Theod. VII 15, 1) to be the father of Aetius. But
134 Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p. the latter Gaudentius was apparently a different person. Cf. 0.
17; Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 10; and Olajos, Antik Tanul- Seeck, s.v. "Gaudentius" (5), RE 7, 1 (1910): p. 859; and Sund-
manyok 13 (1966): p. 184, n. 60. Vollmer conjectures on the wall, Westrdmische Studien (Berlin, 1915), p. 82, no. 197.
basis of his interpretation of vss. 144-197 (see below) that the 139 Cf. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), p. 7, n. 1; and
lost portion of the panegyric depicted the outbreak of war in Bugiani, Storia di Ezio (Florence, 1905), p. 37.
Gaul in 439. This is possible, but another large lacuna after 140Jord. Get. 176. Frigeridus apud Greg. Tur. HF II 8 notes
vs. 143 renders his suggestion tenuous. that Aetius' father Gaudentius was a magnate of the adjacent
136 Frigeridus apud Greg. Tur. HF II 8. Cf. Jord. Get. 176; province of Scythia. In general, cf. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart,
Zosim. V 36, 1. For Gaudentius in general, cf. 0. Seeck, s.v. 1920) 6: pp. 103, 413.
"Gaudentius" (6), RE 7, 1 (1910): p. 859; Sundwall, Westro- 141 Cf. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), p. 7, n. 1.
mische Studien (Berlin, 1915), pp. 81-82, no. 196. 142 Ov. Trist. III 10, 13; Pont. I 3, 50. Sidon. Carm. VII 171-
136 Aug. De civ. Dei XVIII 54; Cons. Constant. s.a. 399 [Chron. 173 apparently echoes this passage of Merobaudes.
min. 1: p. 246]. 143 Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 309, s.v. "Scythicus," correctly
137 Gaudentius was still comes Africae on 21 March, 399. Cf. identifies "Scythicis . . . ensibus" in Merob. Paneg. 11 127 as a
Cod. Theod. XI 17, 3; and Seeck, Regesten (Stuttgart, 1919), reference to the Goths. Thompson, Attila (Oxford, 1948), p. 34,
p. 296. For the rank of magister equitum, cf. Frigeridus apud ignores the direct mention of the Goths in Merob. Carm. IV 43
Greg. Tur. HF II 8. and Paneg. II 134, and conjectures that Merobaudes alludes
138 Chron. Gall. a. CCCCLII 100 [Chron. min. 1: p. 658]; and here to Aetius' period of captivity among the Huns.
Merob. Paneg. 11 112-115. Cf. Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 144The recent defeats of the Visigoths occurred during the
1844), p. 6; Bugiani, Storia di Ezio (Florence, 1905), pp. 36-37; campaign of 435-439. See above, pp. 38-39.
and Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: pp. 104, 413. Wurm 146 Merob. Carm. IV 41-46.
(p. 6) and Hassebrauk, Westrom (Braunschweig, 1899), p. 4, n. 1, 146 Frigeridus apud Greg. Tur. HF II 8.
posed a direct threat to Latium and Rome. Finally, of Africa, reduced Rome to famine by holding up
he implies that AMtius began and completed his deten- grain shipments from Africa. In exasperation Alaric
tion while Alaric was alive.'47 Frigeridus confirms deposed Attalus, and in July, 410, resumed diplomatic
this last intimation and adds an important detail: contact with Honorius. The two men were on the
Atius was Alaric's charge for three years.'48 Now verge of reaching an accord when one of Honorius'
Alaric died at the end of 410.149 Thus at first glance barbarian commanders attacked the Visigothic camp.
the solution to the problem of dating Atius' intern- Alaric was enraged and marched on Rome a third
ment lies in determining a point at least three years time. On 24 August, 410, he and his followers entered
prior to 410 when Alaric threatened Italy in general the city and sacked it for three days.'52
and Rome in particular, and shortly after the imperial Count Zosimus, a historian of the late fifth or early
authorities arranged a treaty with the King. sixth century, furnishes the only direct clue to the
Alaric first invaded Italy in 401. The Vandal precise chronology of Aetius' captivity among Alaric's
Stilicho, the West's chief general at the time, defeated Visigoths. When the king invaded Italy in the
him early the following year at Pollentia in north- autumn of 408, he demanded that he receive Atius
western Italy. Later in 402 he again overpowered and Jason, son of a civil official named Jovius, as
Alaric, this time at Verona. It appears that after hostages and pledges of a prior treaty with Stilicho.153
one or both battles Stilicho reached an agreement According to one school of thought, Zosimus points
whereby Alaric agreed to evacuate Italy. Perhaps to a later date for the internment of Atius. The
Stilicho consented to give Alaric some territory in sources do not directly speak of captives before 408,
Illyricum.'50 At any rate, before the end of 405 and since Honorius did not sanction the agreement the
Alaric appears as a foederatus of the West ready to Senate made with Alaric in 408, it is necessary to look
obey Stilicho's orders and take territory in this area to a later date for Aetius' captivity. Zosimus indi-
belonging to the East.'5' But by 407 a massive cates that in 409 Alaric renewed his demands for a
barbarian invasion into Gaul forced Stilicho, who con- treaty and hostages. Finally the Senate "granted
everything Alaric ordered"-probably including pris-
tinually strove to bring the eastern part of the Balkans
under Western control, to order Alaric to cease his oners. Since Merobaudes implies that Aetius became
advances into eastern territory. Alaric obeyed Stili- imperial collateral when Alaric directly threatened
cho, but in 408 he began to whittle away at Western Rome, the Senate probably surrendered AMtius by the
holdings in the province of Noricum. Furthermore, agreement of 409. Of course there is one problem
with Stilicho's help he attempted to secure a promise with this reconstruction: Frigeridus states that Aetius
of payment in gold for his "services" to the West. was Alaric's prisoner for three years. Since Alaric
But on 22 August, 408, some palace officials engineereddied in 410, Frigeridus is imprecise.154
the execution of Stilicho. A subsequent wave of This chronology is unsatisfactory. It is possible
anti-barbarian sentiment caused the imperial authori- that Frigeridus gives an approximate figure for Atius'
ties to reject Alaric's attempts to bargain for Westerndetention. It is also possible that he presents the
territory at the head of the Adriatic Sea. Alaric correct number of years, but that the Visigoths re-
reacted quickly and invaded Italy in the autumn of leased Aetius when Alaric's brother-in-law Athaulf
the same year. He marched on Rome without meet- was king. But these hypotheses are unlikely, since
ing resistance, and quickly forced the Senate to both Merobaudes and Frigeridus indicate that AMtius
persuade the Emperor Honorius to conclude a new was in the Visigothic camp during Alaric's lifetime.
treaty with him. Alaric then withdrew to Etruria If there is a source which is guilty of chronological
to await the emperor's decision. But in the winter imprecision here, it is not the historian Frigeridus but
of 408/9 Honorius received reinforcements, and the poet Merobaudes. Merobaudes may jumble
showed little inclination to negotiate with the king. Alaric's threat to Rome (408-410) together with his
Alaric made several attempts to reach an accord, but custody of Aetius in order to underscore the latter's
finally he marched on Rome a second time in Novem- importance in an hour of crisis. The imperial authori-
ber, 409, and compelled the Senate to proclaim Priscus ties could have handed Atius over to Alaric at an
Attalus, currently Prefect of the City, as the new earlier date. Indeed, Zosimus states that when
emperor in the West. But the king was still unable to Alaric demanded hostages in 408 he was mindful of a
force an agreement on Honorius. Reinforcements treaty with Stilicho. The fact that he specifically
arrived from the East, and Heraclian, the loyal Count named Atius and Jason suggests that he had a prior
acquaintance with these two boys.155
147 Merob. Carm. IV 41-46; Paneg. II 127-143. 152 Ibid., pp. 249-259.
148 Frigeridus apud Greg. Tur. HF II 8. 153 Zosim. V 36, 1.
149 Cf. Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: p. 262.
154 Wurm, De rebus gestis Aetii (Bonn, 1844), pp. 7-9; and
150 Ibid., pp. 247-249, and 550, n. 154 (with additional remarks
Bugiani, Storia di Ezio (Florence, 1905), pp. 37-43. See also
by Palanque ad loc.).
Lizerand, Aetius (Paris, 1910), p. 16, n. 5. For the agreement
161 Ibid., p. 249 and 551, n. 159 (with additional remarks byof 409, cf. Zosim. VI 6, 3.
Palanque ad loc.). 155 Zosim. V 36, 1.
Many students of the early fifth century connect Roman West with their own eastern habits-that is,
Aetius' captivity with the treaty whereby Stilicho they have learned from the Romans the art of de-
guaranteed Alaric territory in Illyricum. The con- fense. They are armed with shields, spears, swords
jectured date of this treaty varies between 402 and and bows and arrows (155-161).162 Although the
406, but Zosimus reports its substance in the context defenders have the tactical advantage, the bravery of
of events prior to the end of 405. It is unlikely that Atius will win the day (161-163). Atius' troops
Stilicho surrendered Atius as early as 402, for after begin constructing siege towers (164-170). A short
Pollentia and Verona he had the advantage over lacuna appears in the text here, but in verses 171-172
Alaric, and did not have to make friendly overtures the machinery is completed. The siege commences,
to him. Probably Stilicho concluded the pact with and continues night and day with indiscriminate
Alaric in 405, and gave Aetius as a pledge in the same slaughter. Suddenly the enemy begins to weaken.
year. Three years later Alaric released Aetius when Some of the barbarians continue to fight. Some
he resumed his fight against the West following run away, while others seek pardon or peace. Finally
Stilicho's execution. Later in 408 he again demanded flames overwhelm the fortress as Atius' men break
Atius as a hostage.'56 in and slaughter those who are still fighting (173-186).
Merobaudes is still in the course of discussing Atius A treaty of peace follows the victory (186-197).
as Alaric's charge when the text of his poetic pane- The problem with this passage is to identify the
gyric again breaks off at line 143. A considerable enemy Atius encountered in Gaul, and to date the
gap occurs here, during which the poet apparently siege and the treaty which immediately followed
finishes his praise of Atius' ancestry and early years, it."63 One longstanding theory is that the Bacaudae
and addresses himself to various battles which enabled are the foe'64; but this is unlikely. Merobaudes would
the general to restore peace before 1 January, 446.157 surely refer to the Bacaudic uprising of 445.165 When
When the text resumes at verse 144, Merobaudes is he speaks of its suppression at the beginning of this
speaking of encounters in Gaul. He compares Atius' panegyric, he states that with Atius as consul the
exploits in this area with those of Julius Caesar. Armorican Bacaudae are Roman subjects. At the
Like Atius, Caesar fought a Germanic enemy-for end of this work he refers to treaty relations with the
example, the Suebic chieftain Ariovistus. But in vanquished opponents.'66 The difference in status
Caesar's day Rome was stronger, the foe was weaker, indicates that the two adversaries are not identical.
and still it took ten years to complete the conquest Finally, Merobaudes implies that Atius' enemies at
(144-148).58 Aetius' achievement is greater, for in the end of the panegyric are German barbarians.'67
his time the same adversaries are equal to the Romans Of all the Teutonic confederations Atius fought in
in fighting, they are more united, and they are skilled Gaul, the Visigoths best fit Merobaudes' description.
at the defense of fortresses which were once in Caesar's They maintained well-fortified positions in Aquitanica
hands. Still, Aetius has recaptured these bastions II, and they concluded a treaty with Atius. In 439
(148-153) .159 Aetius' lieutenant Litorius fought a battle with the
With this glowing introduction Merobaudes pro- Visigoths near Tolosa (Toulouse), their capital. He
ceeds to describe a terrific siege conducted by Atius
162 For the interpretation of these verses, cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA
(153-186).16O His barbarian adversary stands ready
14: p. 17, ad Merob. Paneg. 11 157; and Thompson, The Early
behind well-fortified walls (153-155).161 The enemy Germans (Oxford, 1965), p. 125, n. 3.
is leaderless, but by prolonged contact with the 163 Merobaudes' abrupt transition from siege to peace (vs. 186)
Romans the barbarians have mixed the ways of the suggests that the treaty occurred shortly after Aetius' victory.
In comparing Aetius' exploits with Caesar's conquest of Gaul
156 Zosim. V 26, 2. Cf. Seeck, Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1920) 6: (144-148) the poet indicates that Aetius gained his victory in the
pp. 103-104, 413-414; Alfoldi, Der Untergang (Berlin, 1926) 2: same region.
p. 87, n. 5; Stein, Histoire (Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 249 and 551, n. 164 Cf. Niebuhr, Fl. Merobaudis reliquiae (Bonn, 1824), p.
159; Mazzarino, Stilicone (Rome, 1942), pp. 73-75, and 157, n. 2; 19; Hansen, De vita Aetii (Dorpat, 1840), part 2: pp. 12-13,
Grumel, Revue des etudes byzantines 9 (1951): pp. 42-43; De- n. 116, and 22-25; Wurm, De rebus gestis (Bonn, 1844), p. 54, n.
mougeot, De l'unite' (Paris, 1951), pp. 363-369; Piganiol, Le sac 1; and Levison, Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft fur dltere deutsche
de Rome (Paris, 1964), p. 91; and Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 Geschichtskunde 29 (1904): p. 139, n. 6 (Levison mentions
(1966): pp. 178, n. 34, and 185, n. 65. Niebuhr's theory without comment). Recently Czu'th, Die
157 Cf. Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: p. 10. Quellen (Szeged, 1965), pp. 16-17 and 37, has adopted a modified
158 Merobaudes specifies a "Teutonic enemy" in vs. 144. This form of this hypothesis. He points to vss. 156-157 as an indica-
is probably a reference to such events as the clash with Ariovistus
tion that Aetius fought a conglomerate of Gallic opponents, in-
and the foray across the Rhine (cf. BG I 31-54; IV 1-19). Cf. cluding the Bacaudae. See also Olajos, Antik Tanulma'nyok 13
Olajos, Antik Tanulmanyok 13 (1966): p. 186, n. 67. But while (1966): pp. 186-187; and Szadeczky-Kardoss, RE Supp. 11
these campaigns took a relatively short time, Merobaudes does (1968): p. 351.
not hesitate to extend them throughout the entire period of con- 165 Cf. Czu'th, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), p. 37; and Szadeczky-
quest in order to put Aetius in a favorable light. Kardoss, RE Supp. 11 (1968): pp. 351-352.
159 The "victor" of vs. 152 is Caesar. 166 Compare Merob. Paneg. II 8-15 and 186-197.
160Vss. 152-153 and 163 show that Aetius commanded the 167 Merob. Paneg. 11 144, 149, 157. Vollmer's interpretation
Roman forces. of vs. 157 is preferable to that of Czu'th (see above, nn. 162
161 Vss. 149 and 157 indicate that the foe is barbarian. and 164).
met disastrous defeat, and died shortly thereafter and which resulted immediately in the conclusion of
from a wound.'68 But Aetius managed to rectify the a peace favorable to the Romans. The sixth-century
situation. Using the future Western Emperor Avitus historian Jordanes also shows traces of a similar clash
as an intermediary he soon concluded a peace with prior to the treaty.172 Merobaudes differs from
the Visigothic King Theoderic I.169 Vollmer conjec- Prosper and Jordanes in one detail: Atius was the
tures that Merobaudes refers to an encounter between clear victor in the siege (183-186). But he admits
Aetius and the Visigoths following Litorius' defeat. that the fighting was confused (173-183), and implies
Aetius laid siege to a Visigothic camp, possibly near that the peace quickly followed Aetius' success (186-
Toulouse. Theoderic was not on hand to direct the 197).173 It is conceivable that he exaggerates the
defense. Immediately after breaching the walls decisiveness of Atius' latest encounter with the
AMtius concluded a treaty with the barbarians.'70 Visigoths.174 But whether it was important or not,
There is both external and internal support for Merobaudes apparently chose this battle and its
Vollmer's attractive suggestion. At the beginning of aftermath as a fitting point to end his poetic panegyric
his panegyric in verse Merobaudes notes that AMtius to Aatius.175
restored Roman authority in southern Gaul by a
'72Prosp. 1338 [Chron. min. 1: p. 477]; Jord. Get. 176-177.
series of campaigns against the Visigoths. He uses
Cf. Loyen, Revue des etudes latines 12 (1934): p. 412; Loyen,
similar language at the end of the work to describe Recherches (Paris, 1942), pp. 47-50; and Courcelle, Histoire
the peace following Aetius' successful siege.'7' The litte'raire (Paris, 1964), p. 159.
chronicler Prosper mentions an indecisive engagement 173 See above, n. 163.
which took place after Litorius' defeat near Toulouse, 174 In arguing that Merobaudes refers in part to the Bacaudae,
Czu'th, Die Quellen (Szeged, 1965), p. 37, points out that near the
end of his poem (see below, n. 175) Merobaudes would probably
168 Prosp. 1335 [Chron. min. 1: p. 476]; Hydat. 116 [ibid. 2: a victory immediately prior to Aetius' consulate of 446.
describe
p. 23]; Salv. De gub. Dei VII 39-43; and Sidon. Carm. VII 300- Thus it is feasible that the poet notes an episode of the Bacaudic
301. Sirago, Galla Placidia (Louvain, 1961), p. 345, n. 1, campaign of 445. This argument stems from the erroneous
identifies Merob. Paneg. 11 153 ff. with Litorius' defeat. But ac- assumption that Merobaudes should recount Aetius' exploits in
cording to Merobaudes the commander of the siege is Aetius, chronological order. Merobaudes is a panegyrist, not a historian.
and the Romans are the victors. At the beginning of this panegyric (vss. 1-29) he does not follow
169 Prosp. 1338 [Chron. min. 1: p. 477]; Hydat. 117 [ibid. a chronological order in narrating Atius' deeds. In vss. 144-197
2: p. 23]; and Sidon. Carm. VII 295-311. Cf. Stein, Histoire he elaborates not on Aetius' most recent campaigns, but on an
(Paris, 1959) 1: pp. 323-324. outstanding battle conducted personally by Aetius prior to 1
'70Vollmer, MGH:AA 14: pp. 10 and 17. Merob. Paneg. II January, 446.
155-156 indicates that the defenders were leaderless. 175 Vollmer, MGH.AA 14: p. 10, conjectures that the last two
171 Compare Merob. Paneg. 11 19-22 and 194. fragments of Panegyric II are near the end of the work.
APPENDIX
VOLLMER'S TEXT OF MEROBAUDES
(MONUMENTA GERMANIAE HISTORICA: A UCTORES ANTIQUISSIMI 14: pp. 3-20)
(CARMINA)
(I)
desunt aliquot versus paginae et carminis Codex p. 260
incumbit foribus pictae Concordia mensae le r

purpureique sacer sexus uterque laris, IcgiXtu
aeternas ubi festa dapes convivia gestant
purpureisque nitent regia fulcra toris.
5 ipse micans tecti medium cum coniuge princ(eps
lucida ceu s(u)mmi possidet astra poli,
terrarum veneranda salus: pro praeside n(ostro
amissas subito flet novus exul opes;
cui natura dedit, victoria reddidit orbem
10 claraque longinquos praebuit aula toro(s.
hic ubi sacra parens placidi petit oscula na(ti,
Castalium credas cum genetrice deum;
cum soror adsistit, nitidae candentia Luna(e
sidera fraterna luce micare putes;
15 si coniux aderit, dicas Nereia Pelei
Hlaemonio Thetidos foedera iuncta toro.
bac etiam de prole licet sperare nepotem,
cui Larisa suum conferat una virum.
en nova iam suboles, quae vix modo missa sqb (auras
20 mystica iam tenero pectore sacra gerit,
vagitu confessa deum; sentire putare(s,
mollia sic tremulo moverat ora sono.
o felix, uno geminam cui tempore vitam
p. 259 dest carminis primi unus, vix tres vermS.

benc krtw (II)
unum distichon deesse videtur
aul)a uiret pulchram domini sortita iuventam
i)psaque primaevo lumine tecta nitent,
qu)ae Phoebi flammata rotis et principis ostro
aetheris ac terrae sidera mixta tenent.
s m)armoreos rigat unda lacus fictasque metallis
cornigeras rapido proluit amne feras
. ..)aque festinis onerat crystalla fluentis:
gemma vehit laticem, quae fuit ante latex.
*)mina celsa tenet socia cum coniuge princeps,
10 c)uius sacra petit pignora mandus ovans.
mi)ra fides! optare licet, qui sceptra capessant,
n)ec numerum regum poscere vota timent
et) dominos secura sui de stemmate regni
c)ontinuat proprios dum creat aula novos.
60
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 1971] VOLLMER'S TEXT 61
(III)
.DIAR ...............
ex)plicat aestivas ramis errantibus umbras
f)rigoris arcani silva referta gelu
nec) commune sibi tempus permittit 6t anno
pr)ivatamque hiemem frondea tecta tenent.
5 int)ertonsa comas Spartani marmoris instar
por)rigit excisum buxus amoena latus,
qua)m nec Achaemeniae possent penetrare sagittae ...
dutnt quattuor, vix sex verss p. 256

s .... M)arti iunxit amica Venus. be"
inittaleor;
versumn
dan#tt p. 273
(IV)
Annus panditur ecce iam secundus

et festum puero diem reducit,
quo vitalibus inchoatus auris
infusi bibit aetheris vigorem.
s omnes nunc Latiae favete Musae,
omnes nunc Latiae virete silvae;
vernent limina laureisque sertis
inserpant hederae vagante nexu;
exultet placido tumore Thybris
1o et nulla rutilus nec asper unda
hibernis vada molliat serenis.
laxet pectora bellicosa ductor
(est dignus rude) lacteamque prolem
nodosis ferus ambiat lacertis;
15 adsit cum socio parente coniunx,
coniunx non levibus canenda musis,
heroum suboles, propago regum;
cuius gloria feminam su(p)erstat;
quae non ut Thetis anxium pavorem
20 secretis Stygos abluit sub undis
et natum trepidis anhela curis
contra fata deum metusque leti ..
p. 255 dessnt 4 fere versus

mninus facil primaevos pueri rec(entis) art(
kegitur plenis numine fontibus rigavit,
25 qua puri deus arbiter lavacri
arcana laticum receptus unda
pellit crimina nec sinit fuisse
et vitam novat obruitque poenam.
his te primitiis, puer, sacratum
3o excepit gremio micante Roma
et nudi lateris recincta vestem,
quae bellis procul omnibus patebat,
nutricem tibi praebuit papillam.
felix distulit adtulitque partum
3s Lucinae mora: praestitit morari,
ut spebus timidis diu negatus
et civis dominae futurus Vrbi
natalem tibi regiam Quirini
et primas Latii domos videres,
40 proles Martia Martios penates,
hoc iam clarior inclyto parente,
quod vix puberibus pater sub annis
obiectus Geticis puer catervis,
bellorum mora, foederis sequester,
45 intentas Latio faces removit
ac mundi pretium fuit paventis.
(PANE GYRICUS I)
desunt aliquot paginae codicis et p. 274 fere 4 versus p. 274
frg; I A .... fort)una tua potius quam a na(tura . . .s ws dj5icil*s
nihil quod cupias latere deprehendi (potest; de- letu;
nique omnia agis ut qui scias in conspe(ctu et iudi- feie 6-8 litderun
cio omnium esse quod gesseris.
5 Lateant ergo hi quos deprehendi pudet( - nec enim
bonae conversationis est nimis pet(ere secre-
tum - et tamen mali frustra arbitros f(ugiunt;
quid enim eis prodest non habere co(nscios, qui
habent conscientiam? veniant sane ad (nos qui vo-
lo lunt arbitri, quam volunt severi iudic(es morum
atque virtutum nec tantum Catones nost(ri sed et pe-
regrina Lacedaemoniorum et Athen(iensium
nomina: nullum profecto tempus, null(um diem,
nullam denique horam in actibus tuis quam (non admi-'
i5 rentur invenient. tibi enim cubil(e nuda ru-
pes aut tenue velamen in caespite, nox (in vigiliis,
dies in laboribus, iniuria iam pro volunta(te, lorica
non tam munimen quam vestimentum, (.......
non adparatus sed conversatio, postre(mo.
20 qui aliis procinctus, tibi usus est.
Nec inmerito te ita communem alacrit(ati ac la-
bori, labori ac potestati natura forma(vit...
oreciium gra.uares la . oran . ra .....
proximitas tua i .. velocitatem tuam ....
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 19711 VOLLMER'S TEXT 63
desunt fere 4 verSUs p. 273

frg. I B ...... na tentorio in aequum q ........ gu. ficil lectu;
...... tentoriurm ducit. tune si quid a bellis fere 6-8 iitierae
vacat, a)ut situs urbium aut angustias montium
aut vasta) camporum aut fluminum transitus aut
5 viarum) spatia metiris atque ibi quis pediti, quis,
equiti) accommodatior locus, quis excursui
aptior, qu)is receptui tutior, quis stationi uberi-
or, explo)ras. ita ad bellum proficit etiam ipsa in-
tercaped)o bellorum. iam vero praeter Mar-
io tias laud)es cuius tanta in consiliis alacritas, in
iudici)is severitas, in conloquiis mansuetu-
do, in vult)u aequalitas, in ira brevitas, in amore
diuturn)itas? o fortunatissimum orationis
meae te)mpus: vera me dicere omnes fatentur,
15 queruntu)r hactenus me de actibus tuis aliquanta
omisisse). et quidem multum dicturo obest igno-
rantia; d)ebet nosse quem loquitur. nec sola
illa de v)iris fortibus praedicanda sunt quae pu-
blica fa)ma denuntiat. nam et cum victoria per-
2o . . )tum, designatur hoc nomine quidquid
contuli)t favens fortuna bellorum: non tamen
sic audie)ntum impleat animos, ut si.ipsa itinera
atque moli)mina et imago certaminum et vulnera
et exit)ia et hostili caede pulvis cruentatus ***
desunt fere 4 versus p. 270

frg. II A lentem in collegium togae senatus adscivit. bene egitr
pro his me laudibus tuis Roma cum principe vic-
tiro aere formavit, pro his denique nuper ad ho-
noris maximi nomen ille nascenti soli prox(i-
s mus imperator evexit. intellexit enim, qua fide eius pr(ae-
sentis gesta memorarem, qui de absentis
meritis non tacerem. iam considera, ductor
invicte, quanta tibi haec agenti praemia deb(e-
antur, pro quibus mihi tanta sunt conlata refe-
lo renti. tibi quidem nullum commune praemi-
um nec par ceteris honor aut laus aliqua usit(a-
ta referenda est. habes tamen praemiatrice(m
conscientiam tuam: etenim recte factorum
summus fructus est fecisse nec ullum virtu-
1s tum pretium dignum ipsis extra ipsas est. ergo
vel ego vel alii qui in hac dicendi professione
sunt, quotiens de actibus tuis aliqua disserimus,
aut ingenia nostra exercemus aut vota ceter(orum:
tu tibi inniteris, ad te respicis nec ullum quod
20 imitari velis exemplar extra te quaeris; et ta-
men nulla regio, nullus locus, nulla denique lin-
gua laudibus tuis vacua est. euntes in Thracia(m
triumphum, qui consiliis tuis intra Hispanias(
deau fere 4 ver8icul p. 269
frg-. II B t)ui aestimator es, quam enormis

i)nsueta gratulatio sit, cum aliquis index de ac-
t)ibus tuis secunda loquitur. praeter id enim quod
i)n te mundi amor consonat, quem probasti, tum
s i)n successibus tuis veritas ipsa delectat: nemo
enim de fama dubitat quotiens vicisse te nuntiat.
D)elatus ego in augusti litoris sinuum, qua Salonas usque
per anfractus terrae pronum pelagus
inlabitur, nactus sum quendam qui se tuis re-
1o centibus gestis interfuisse memoraret.
'Gothorum' inquit 'manus universa cum rege
exierat Romana populatum. hoc ut dux comperit'-
i)am non expectavi ut diceret: 'progressus est, ma-
num contulit', neque enim haec a te acta dubitabam,
i5 quaesivi statim, ubi qualiter quantosve fudis-
ses. tunc ille: 'ad montem' inquit 'quem Colubra-
rium quasi praescia vocavit antiquitas (in eo
enim nunc rei publicae venena prostrata sunt), maximam
hostium partem inprovisus, ut solet, neci dedit
2o f)usisque peditum copiis, quae plurimae erant, ipse
p)alantes turmas persecutus stantes robore,
flugientes alacritate conpressit. nec multo
p)ost rex ipse cum reliquis copiis suis adfuit
d)efixusque horrore subito calcata prope cadavera
(PANEGYRICVS 11)
(PRAEFATIO)
periit fere tota cum foijis quae antecedbant
si hic litterae excusandae sunt. p. 257,
E (X) P (L) I (C) I (T) P (R) A (E) F (A) T (I) 0

satis bane legu*ntur
Danuvii cum pace redit Tanainque furore

exuit et nigro candentes aethere terras
Marte suo caruisse iubet; dedit otia ferro
Caucasus et saevi condemnant proelia reges.
s addidit hiberni famulantia foedera Rhenus
orbis et Hesperiis flecti contentus habenis
gaudet ab alterna Thybrin sibi crescere ripa.
lustrat Aremoricos iam mitior incola saltus,
perdidit et mores tellus adsuetaque saevo
1o crimine quaesitas silvis celare rapinas
discit inexpertis Cererem committere campis
Caesareoque diu manus obluctata labori
sustinet acceptas nostro sub consule leges
et quamvis Geticis sulcum confundat aratris
15 barbara vicinae refugit consortia gentis.
hinc quoque, Tyrrhenis qua fluctibus ima resultat
Gallia et aerii conscendens ardua montis
limite nimboso terras perstringit Hiberas,
nil no8trl iam iuris erat. sod belliger ultor
io captivum reseravit iter clausasque recepit
expulso praedone vias populosque relictis
urbibus et sociis confinia reddidit arvis.
undique iam S3cythicis erepta furoribus hostem
dasunt fare duo versus
insessor Libyes quamvis fatalibus armis p. 258;

25 ausus Elissaei solium rescindere regni fles p. 271;
milibus Arctois Tyrias conpleverat arces. Optirne leguntur
nunc hostem exutus pactis proprioribus arsit
Romanam vincire fidem Latiosque parentes
adnumerare sibi sociamque intexere prolem.
so sic tranquilla togae recipit dum praemia ductor
pacatamque iubet lituos nescire curulem,
ipsa triumphales habitus mirantia passim
bella dedere locum. Scythici iuvat axe subacto
cardinis arcanis lustrare securibus urbem.
3s ipse pater Mavors, Latii fatalis origo,
festa ducis socii trucibus non inpedit armis:
tela dei currusque silent vacuique iugales
pabula Rhiphaeis retegunt abstrusa pruinis.
exarmat Bellona comas galeamque remittens
do pulvereum glauca crinem praecingit oliva
cristatamque docet foliis mansuescere frontem.
hanc tot bella tibi requiem, Romane, dederunt:
Pax armis accita venit, Victoria semper
ductoris sociam traxit praelata curulem.
-s post lauros rediere togae meritumque secuti
alta triumphorum relegunt vestigia fasces.
nec certare valent: vincit sua praemia virtus
successumque labor superat. quae nunera Fati
acta viri pensare queant? an nomina rara *
desnt fere 2 versus paginae
intercidit unum folium i. fere 56 versm et p. 268 fere versu 4 p. 268

so A ...... et Nili populis ploratus (Osiris. optime lgitw
despicimur: sic cuncta mei revere(ntia regni
alterna sub sorte perit: depellim(ur undis
nec terris regnare licet. nec inulta (feremus
haec tamen et nostris aderit sors ius(ta querellis:
S5 eliciam summo gentes aquilone r(epostas
Phasiacoque pavens.innabitur hospit(e Thybris.
confundam populos, regnorum foede(ra rumpam,
nobilis et nostris miscebitur aula (procellis.'
haec ait et pigros zephyris invecta t(riones
so nubila Rhiphaei penetraverat algida (montis.
hic curva sub rupe sedens crude(lis Enyo
texerat annosa refugum sub pace f(urorem.
huius luctus erat, quod sit sine lucti(bus orbis:
laetis maesta gemit. squalent infor(mia taetro
65 ora situ siccique rigent in veste cruo(res;
dura supinato pendent retinacula (curru,
languet apex galeae, clipei nec trist(is in orbe
lux rubet et totae pereunt mucroni(bus hastae.
hanc ubi diva nocens liquido de trami(te cernit,
70 desilit et tali residem licet excitat o(rsu:
fquis miseros, germana, tibi sopor ob(ruit artus
pace sub inmensa? quoniam tua pecto(ra...
mensit iniqua quies, inopes tua classi(ca....
desunt 4 vel 6 ver p. 267
.............. )es habitue, tege casside (vultus, .... a c " "o

is coge truce)s in bella globos Scythicasque pharetras
egerat i)gnotis Tanais bacchatus in oris.
auratas con)sterne domos et operta metallis
culmina, qua)e toto Latii conspeximus orbe;
fulgentes i)n tela ruant: gravis ardeat auro
so balteus, a)uratae circumdent tela pharetrae,
aurea cri)spatis insidat lamna lupatis;
incendant) gemmae chalybem ferroque micantes
capsidis a)uratis facibus lnx induat enses.
moenia n)ulla tuos valeant arcere furores:
85 gentes at)que tremant furialia murmura reges.
tum super)os terris atque hospita numina pelle:
ture suo p)opulare deos et nullus in aris
messis od)oratae fotus strue palleat ignis.
ast ego te)cta dolis palatia celsa subibo.
90 maioru)m mores et pectora prisca fugabo:
segnes at)que simul nullo discrimine rerum
laudentur) fortes nec sit reverentia iustis
spretaque n)eglecto pereat facundia Phoebo,
indig)nis contingat honos et pondera rerum
95 non virt)us, sed casus agat tristisque cupido
cordibus et) saevi demens furor aestuet auri.
non tamen) haec sine mente Iovis, sine numine summo ...
interciderunt 2 folia i. fere 110 vers et p. 262 fere 4 versus p. 262

'... et placidus sub pace pudor. non proelia mandet, initia p. 267;
sed gerat et priscis instauret fata triumphis, no ie,qunsr
too quem non praeda docens aurique insana cupido
cogat inexhaustis animum permittere curie,
sed ferri laudandus amor Latiique cruoris
indocilis iugulisque madens hostilibus ensis
indomitum mitemque probet'. nec vota cadebant
1oS in dubium notumque fuit quem posceret Orbis:
Aetium coniunctus amor populique patrumque
et procerum mens omnis habet. nec dicere museant,
sed petiere palam. iam quod sententia mundi
cunctorumque fides nullis auctoribus ambit,
ito Fata iubent: aderat studiis iuvitque favorem
nota viri virtus et magni gloria patris.
nam claro genitore satus - sed forte parentem
caedibus Arctois et iusta sorte potitum
callidus et falsa tectus prece perculit ensis
iis mercatum vita leti decus: haut secus olim
pugnacee Fabii patria pro gente cadebant
et Decius, propero lucem qui fine refudit,
sed famam sine fine tenet, nam mortis amorem
pensat laudis honor - tanti eibi conscius heros
52o eanguinie emeritum praeetantibus innovat actis
deunt 4 ml 5 rsus p. 261
ut vix prona novis erexit gressibus ora fin p. 268;

primaque reptatis nivibus vestigia fixit,
mox iaculum petiere manus lusitque gelatis
imbribus et siccis imitatus missile lymphis
12s temptavit pugnas tenerosque ad proelia ludos
imbuit et veras iam tune respexit ad hastas.
nec mora, cum Scythicis succumberet ensibus orbis
telaque Tarpeias premerent Arctoa secures,
hostilem fregit rabiem pignusque superbi
i3o foederis et mundi pretium fuit (hine modo voti
rata fides, validis quod dux premat impiger armiis
edomuit quos pace puer) bellumque repressit
ignarus, quid bella forent. stupuere feroces
in tenero iam membra Getae. rem ipse verendum
in miratus pueri decus et prodentia fatum
lumina primaevas dederat gestare pharetras
laudabatque manus librantem et tela gerentem
oblitus quod noster erat. pro nescia regis
cordas, fens quanto populis discrimine constet
uo quod Latium docet arma ducem! sed nomine natum
nuncupat et mavult naturae dicere pignus
quam pacis. tali teneros sub iudice primum
gaudebat studiis flammare ferocibus annos *
desa duae paginae i: fere 56 versus

Teutonicum Latiis hostem cum ste(rneret armis p. 271
145 tune ad bella rudem nec adulto ma(rte probatum; op4i:Te kgA&r
ille tamen magnis opibus Romaque vire(nte
Gallica bis quinos certamina traxi(t in annos
et senior post bella redit. nune glo(ria maior,
quod iam barbaricae mutatos semi(ne terrae
i15 et bellare pares, uno quod tempore (cunctos,
quod clausos castris hostes supera(vit et arces,
quae quondam victoris erant, hic dext(ra recepit
magnanimi luctata ducis. nam claust(ra tegebant
et turritus apex ingestaque moenia c(olli
i1s naturam cumulante manu. nec signi(fer unus
illic, turba fuit, longo sed tempore c(astris
barbaries iunctis occasum miscui(t ortu.
stat clipeis vallata cohors, hastilia (torquens,
ense minax volucrique nocens per in(ane sagitta,
la0 nobile non animis, sed non ignobile (factis
vulgus; inaequali iustus Mars sorte (probatur:
invius hine vertex manibusque et moenibus (horrens,
inde ducis virtus bellum domitu(ra per artem.
ergo immite fremens coniuncto ro(bore miles
l6s naturae certare parat. cadit agmin(e caesa
silva ferox: nudi mirantur sidera (fontes
ignotumnque vident montana cubilia (caelum.
tex;itur in turres abies et vincere (muros
iussa renitentes exaterret culmin(e pinnas.
170 horrib;)les crevere viae, quas vique (manuque
desutat fcre 2 versus
p. 272
....... )us longis in caelum molibus urget
difficillima lectu,
aeriis)que iubet socios consistere castris.
usu detrita et mIC-
iam nullu)s sine Marte dies, nox omnis in armis.
dicamentis male
habita tunc latet) obscuras bellatrix pinna per umbras
175 illatu)ra neces et mors ineerta tenebris
dimov)et indubia quamvis sub sorte cruorem.
ancipiti )gnaros fatorum lumine cursus
avia te)la regunt et letum errantia portant.
iamque sub)actorum bello pars magna reorum
180 pacta diu) tardata (p)a(r)at sensimque recepta
. .. ..... )are minas et iam discordibus armis,
dum pars b)ella gerit, veniam pars poscere gestu,
pars prope)rare fugam, donec penetrata labore
longo vi)ctrices hauserunt moenia flammae
185 proeliaque op)tatam en victis dant ultima famam,
qui saevo sub) Marte cadunt. sed carmina tandem
sancta c)ruentatos vertant ad foedera cantus:
semper) bella sonant, semper memorabitur hostis.
pax sat la)udis habet, cui tot praemisimus arma:
19o pax mun)di longaeva salus, qua vindice tutam
exerc)ent elementa fidem, qua conprimit undas
Vulcanu)s noctisque vices lux alma recondit,
Phoebo n)ec siccas urit Titania terras;
pax popu)Iis quae iura dedit, quae condidit urbes
195 *.xit Latium post bella Quirini
...... c . ato animam virtute Quirinum
. ...B.us geminos oris nunc m
dest finis
DE CHRISTO
Proles vera dei cunctisque antiquior annis,
nune genitus, qui semper eras, lucisque repertor
ante tuam matrisque parens; quem misit ab astris
aequaevus genitor verbique in semina fusum
5 virgineos habitare sinus et corporis arti
iussit inire vias parvaque in sede morai,
quem sedes non ulla capit; qui lumine primo
vidisti quicquid mundo nascente crearas,
ipse opifex, opus ipse tui, dignatus iniquas
1o aetatis sentire vices et corporis huius
dissimiles perferre modos hominemque subire,
ut possis monstrare deum, ne lubricus error
et decepta diu varii sollertia mundi
pectora tam multis sineret mortalia saeclis
1S auctorem nescire suum; te conscia partus
mater et attoniti pecudum sensere timores,
te nQva sollicito lustrantes sidera visu
in caelo videre prius lumenque secuti
invenere magi; tu noxia pectora solvis
2o elapsasque animas in corpora functa reducis
et vitam remeare iubes; tu lege recepti
muneris ad manes penetras mortisque latebras
immortalis adis: nasci tibi non fuit uni
principium finisque mori, sed nocte refusa
as in caelum patremque redis rursusque perenni

ordine purgatis adimis contagia terris;
tu solus patrisque comes, tu spiritus insons
et toties unus triplicique in nomine simplex:
quid nisi pro cunctis, aliud quis credere possit
30 te potuisse mori, poteras qui reddere vitam?
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SECONDARY WORKS CITED
ALAND, KURT. 1963. Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? CAMERS, JOHANNES. 1510. Claudiani opera novissime per D. Io.
Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray (London, 1963). Camertem accuratissime recognita.
- 1963. Die Sduglingstaufe im Neuen Testament und in der CAMUZAT, NICOLAS. 1610. Promptuarium sacrarum antiquita-
alten Kirche: Eine Antwort an Joachim Jeremias. Theo- tum Tricassinae dioecesis (Augusta Trecarum).
logische Existenz Heute, Neue Folge 86 (2nd ed., Munich). CHADWICK, NoRA K. 1955. Poetry and Letters in Early
1967. Die Stellung der Kinder in den friihen christlichen Christian Gaul (London).
Gemeinden und ihre Taufe. Theologische Existenz Heute, CHASTAGNOL, ANDRE. 1956. "Le senateur Volusien et la con-
Neue Folge 138 (Munich). version d'une famille de l'aristocratie romaine au Bas-Empire."
ALF6LDI, ANDREAS. 1924 and 1926. Der Untergang der Romer- Revue des etudes anciennes 58: pp. 241-253.
herrschaft in Pannonien. Ungarische Bibliothek fur das CHASTAGNOL, ANDRE. 1958. "Observations sur le consulat
Ungarische Institut an der Universitat Berlin, Reihe I, 10 suffect et la pr6ture du Bas-Empire." Revue historique 219:
and 12 (2 v., Berlin and Leipzig). pp. 221-253.
ALTHEIM, FRANZ. 1959-1962. Geschichte der Hunnen (5 v., - 1962. Les fastes de la Prefecture de Rome au Bas-Empire.
Berlin). ttudes prosopographiques 2 (Paris).
ANTONIo, NICOLAS. 1696. Bibliotheca hispana vetus (2 v., CLOVER, FRANK M. 1966. "Geiseric the Statesman: A Study
Rome). of Vandal Foreign Policy." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
BACHRACH, BERNARD S. 1967. "The Alans in Gaul." Traditio Department of Classical Languages and Literature, University
23: pp. 476-489. of Chicago (Chicago).
BALIL, A. 1965. "Aspectos sociales del Bajo Imperio (s. IV-s. COHEN, HENRY. 1880-1892. Description historique des mon-
VI): Los senadores hispanicos." Latomus 24: pp. 886-904. naies frappees sous l'Empire romain communement appelges
BARABINO, GIUSEPPINA. 1965. Claudio Mamertino: II pane- medailles impe'riales (8 v., Paris).
girico dell'imperatore Giuliano. Pubblicazioni dell' Istituto di CORBETT, PERCY E. 1930. The Roman Law of Marriage
Filologia classica dell' Universit'a di Genova 20 (Genoa). (Oxford).
BARTOLI, ALFONSO. 1946-1947. "Il Senato romano in onore CORSARO, FRANCESCO. 1965. Querolus: Studio introduttivo e
di Ezio." Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia romana di commentario (Bologna).
Archeologia 22: pp. 267-273. CORSINI, EUGENIO. 1968. Introduzione alle "Storie" di Orosio
BAYNES, NORMAN H. 1922. "A Note on Professor Bury's (Turin).
'History of the Later Roman Empire.' " Jour. Roman Studies COSENZA, MARIO E. 1905. Olficial Positions after the Time of
12: pp. 207-229. Constantine (Lancaster, Pa.).
BELLARDI, GIOVANNI. 1964. Plinio il Giovine: Lettere, libro COURCELLE, PIERRE. 1954. Review of Ricerche sui rapporti
decimo; il panegirico di Traiano (Bologna). tra i Vandali e l'Impero romano, by A. Gitti. Revue des etudes
BICKEL, E. 1905. "De Merobaude imitatore Senecae." Rheini- latines 32: pp. 450-451.
sches Museum fur Philologie, ser. 2, 60: p. 317. 1964. Histoire litteraire des grandes invasions germaniques
BISCHOFF, BERNARD, and WILHELM KOEHLER. 1939. "Eine (3rd ed., Paris).
illustrierte Ausgabe der spatantiken ravennater Annalen." 1966. "Le serpent a face humaine dans la numismatique
Medieval Studies in Memory of A. Kingsley Porter, edited by imperiale du Ve siecle." Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire
Wilhelm Koehler (2 v., Cambridge, Mass.) 1: pp. 125-138. offerts & Andre Piganiol, edited by Raymond Chevallier (3 v.,
BLOK, DIRK PETER. 1968. De Franken: Hun optreden in het Paris) 1: pp. 343-353.
licht der historie (Bussum). COURTOIS, CHRISTIAN. 1955. Les Vandales et l Afrique (Paris).
BOONE, WILLEM JAN DE. 1954. De Franken van hun eerste COVILLE, ALFRED. 1928. Recherches sur l'histoire de Lyon du
optreden tot de dood van Childerik (Amsterdam). Vme siecle au IXme siecle [450-800] (Paris).
BORN, LESTER K. 1934. "The Perfect Prince according to the CZ1JTH, BALA, and SAMU SZADECZKY-KARDOSS. 1958. "The
Latin Panegyrists." Amer. Jour. Philology 55: pp. 20-35. Bacaudic Movement in Spain." In Hungarian, summarized
BORZA, EUGENE N. 1962. "The Bacaudae: A Study of in Bibliotheca classica orientalis 3: p. 140.
Rebellion in Late Roman Gaul." Unpublished M. A. dis- CZ(TH, BALA. 1965. Die Quellen der Geschichte der Bagauden.
sertation, Department of History, University of Chicago Acta Universitatis de Attila Jozsef nominatae: Acta antiqua
(Chicago). et archaeologica 9 (Szeged).
BRAUN, RENA. 1959. "Un temoignage litteraire meconnu sur DEGRASSI, ATTILIO. 1946-1948. "L'iscrizione in onore di Aezio
l'Abaritana provincia." Revue africaine 103: pp. 114-116. e 1' 'Atrium Libertatis'." Bullettino della Commissione archeo-
BUGIANI, CARLO. 1905. Storia di Ezio, generale dell'Impero logica comunale di Roma 72: pp. 33-44.
sotto Valentiniano III (Florence).
1952. I fasti consolari dell'Impero romano dal 30 avanti
BURDEAU, FRANSOIS. 1964. "L'empereur d'apres les Pane-
Christo al 613 dopo Cristo (Rome).
gyriques latins." Aspects de l'Empire romain. Edited by
DELBRUYCK, RICHARD. 1929. Die Consulardiptychen und ver-
Frangois Burdeau, Nicole Charbonnel, and Michel Humbert.
wandte Denkmdler (Berlin and Leipzig).
Travaux et recherches de la Faculte de Droit et des Sciences
DEMOUGEOT, EMILIENNE. 1951. De l'unite c la division de
6conomiques de Paris, serie Sciences historiques 1 (Paris),
pp. 1-60. l'Empire romain, 395-410: Essai sur le gouvernement imperial
(Paris).
BURGER,FRANZX. 1904. Minucius Felix und Seneca (Munich).
BURY, JOHN B. 1919. "Justa Grata Honoria." Jour. Roman - 1962. "Les invasions germaniques et la rupture des rela-
Studies 9: pp. 1-13. tions entre la Bretagne et la Gaule." Le Moyen Age 68: pp.
1-50.
-- 1923. A History of the Later Roman Empire from the Death
of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian (2 v., 2nd ed., London).DEROLEZ, A. 1958. "La Cite des Atrebates a l'epoque romaine:
CAHN, H. A. 1937. "Muinzfunde, Kleinhiiningen, I: Trierer Documents et problemes." Revue du Nord 40: pp. 506-524.
Siliquen des Valentinianus III. und des Theodosius II." DESANGES, J. 1963. "Un temoignage peu connu de Procope
Revue suisse de numismatique 27: pp. 425-430. sur la Numidie vandale et byzantine." Byzantion 33: pp.
CAMELOT, PIERRE-THoMAS. 1966. "Le baptgme des petits 41-69.
enfants dans l'Eglise des premiers siecles." La Maison-Dieu DESSAU, HERMANN (ed.). 1892-1916. Inscriptiones latina e
88: pp. 23-42. selectae (3 v., Berlin).
70
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 1971] BIBLIOGRAPHY 71
DIDIER, J.-C. 1967. Faut-il baptiser les enfants? La response GRIFFE, JALIE. 1964-1966. La Gauke chrhtienne a l'e poque
de la tradition (Paris). romaine (3 v., 2nd ed. of vols. 1 and 2, Paris).
DIEHL, ERNST, et al. (eds.). 1961-1967. Inscriptiones latinas 1965. "La vie de saint Germain d'Auxerre." Bulletin de
christianae veteres (4 v., Berlin). littMrature ecclesiastique 66: pp. 289-294.
DIESNER, HANS-JOACHIM. 1964. Der Untergang der r6mischen GROSJEAN, PAUL. 1957. "Notes d'hagiographie celtique."
Herrschaft in Nordafrika (Weimar). Analecta bollandiana 75: pp. 158-226.
- 1966. Das Vandalenreich: Aufstieg und Untergang GRUMEL, V. 1951. "L'Illyricum de la mort de Valentinien
(Stuttgart). Ier (375) a la mort de Stilichon (408)." Revue des etudes
DILL, SIR SAMUEL. 1926. Roman Society in Gaul in the byzantines 9: pp. 5-46.
Merovingian Age (London). GUICHARD, RENE. 1965. Essai sur I'histoire du peuple bur.
DURRY, MARCEL. 1938. Pline le Jeune: Panegyrique de Trajan gonde: De Bornholm (Burgundarholm) vers la Bourgogne et les
(Paris). Bourguignons (Paris).
- 1955. "Le mariage des filles impuberes a Rome." Comptes GUNTHER, RIGOBERT. 1965. "Revolution und Evolution im
rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 1955: westr6mischen Reich zur Zeit der Spatantike." Zeitschriftfar
pp. 84-91. Geschichtswissenschaft, Sonderheft: Evolution und Revolution in
-- 1955. "Le mariage des filles impuberes chez les anciens der Weltgeschichte 13: pp. 19-34.
Romains." Anthropos 50: pp. 432-434. GUTZWILLER, HANS (ed.). 1942. Die Neujahrsrede des Konsuls
-- 1955. "Le mariage des filles impuberes dans la Rome Claudius Mamertinus vor dem Kaiser Julian (Freiburg).
antique." Revue internationale des droits de l'antiquit6 ser. 3, HAMMOND, MASON. 1933. "Concilia deorum from Homer
2: pp. 263-273. through Milton." Studies in Philology 30: pp. 1-16.
- 1956. "Sur le mariage romain: Autocritique et mise au
HANSEN, AUGUST. 1840. De vita Aetii Gaudentii filii (part 2,
point." Revue internationale des droits de l'antiquite ser. 3, Dorpat).
3: pp. 227-243.
HARNACK, ADOLF VON. 1958 (reprint). History of Dogma.
- 1956. "Sur le mariage romain." Gymnasium 63: pp.
Translated by N. Buchanan (New York).
187-190.
HASSEBRAUK, GUSTAV. 1899. Westrom zur Zeit des Aetius,
ENGELMANN, ERIKA. "Zur Bewegung der Bagauden im r6mi-
425-454 (Braunschweig).
schen Gallien." Vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit: Zum 65. Geburt-
HEIL, WILHELM. 1966. Der konstantinische Patriziat. Basler
stag von Heinrich Sproemberg, edited by H. Kretzschmar
Studien zur Rechtswissenschaft 78 (Basel and Stuttgart).
(Berlin), pp. 373-385.
ENSSLIN, WILHELM. 1927. Review of Der Untergang der HEIMSOETH, FRIEDRICH (ed.). 1843. "C. Fr. Heinrichii reli-
Rdmerherrschaft in Pannonien, by A. Alfoldi. Philologische quiae nonnullae criticae." Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie,
ser. 2, 2: pp. 531-543.
Wochenschrift 47: pp. 842-852.
- 1931. "Zum Heermeisteramt des spatr6mischen Reiches, HOLDER, ALFRED. 1896-1919. Alt-celtischer Sprachschatz (3 v.
III: Der magister utriusque militiae et patricius des 5. Jahr- with Nachtrage, Leipzig).
hunderts." Klio 24: pp. 467-502. JEEP, LUDWIG. 1873. "Die alteste Textesrecension des Claud-
EVISON, VERA I. 1965. The Fifth-Century Invasions South of ian." Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie, ser. 2, 28: pp.
the Thames (London). 291-304.
FABRICIUS, GEORGIUS. 1564. Poetarum veterum ecclesiasticorum JEREMIAS, JOACHIM. 1960. Infant Baptism in the First Four
opera christiana (Basel). Centuries. Translated by D. Cairns (London).
FLETCHER, IAN, and D. S. CARNE-ROSS. 1965. "Ekphrasis: - 1963. The Origins of Infant Baptism: A Further Study in
Lights in Santa Sophia, from Paul the Silentiary." Arion Reply to Kurt Aland, translated by Dorothea M. Barton
4: pp. 563-581. (London).
FLICHE, AUGUSTIN, and VICTOR MARTIN (eds.). 1934-. Histoire JONES, A. H. M. 1964. The Later Roman Empire, 284-602:
de l'Eglise depuis les origines jusqu'a nos jours (Paris). A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey (3 v., Oxford).
FONTAINE, JACQUES. 1961. Review of Da Claudiano a Mero- JULLIAN, CAMILLE. 1928. "Les ascendants de Clovis." Revue
baude: Aspetti della poesia cristiana di Merobaude, by S. de Paris 35, 5: pp. 261-287.
Gennaro. Latomus 20: pp. 592-594. KAEGI, WALTER E., JR. 1968. Byzantium and the Decline of
FORCELLINI, EGIDIO. 1858-1875. Totius latinitatis lexicon (6 Rome (Princeton).
v., Prati). KORSUNSKI, A. R. 1961. "The Movement of the Bacaudae."
- 1859-1887. Totius latinitatis onomasticon (4 v., Prati). In Russian, summarized in Bibliotheca classica orientalis 6: pp.
FRIEDLANDER, PAUL (ed.). 1912. Johannes von Gaza und 82-89.
Paulus Silentiarius: Kunstbeschreibung justinianischer Zeit KRUMBACHER, KARL. No date (reprint). Geschichteder byzanti-
(Berlin and Leipzig). nischen Litteratur von Justinian bis zum Ende des ostromischen
GALLATIER, EDOUARD (ed.). 1949-1955. Panegyriques latins Reiches (527-1453) (2 v., 2nd ed., New York).
(3 v., Paris). LAFAURIE, J. 1964. "Monnaie en argent trouv6e I Fleury-
GARCfA GARRIDO, MANUEL. 1957. "'Minor annis XII nupta.' sur-Orne: Essai sur le monnayage d'argent Franc des Ve et
Labeo 3: pp. 76-88. VIe si&les." Annales de Normandie 14: pp. 173-196.
GENNARO, SALVATORE. 1959. Da Claudiano a Merobaude: LANE, G. M. 1903. A Latin Grammar for Schools and Colleges
Aspetti della poesia cristiana di Merobaude (Catania). (2nd ed., New York).
GENTZ, GUYNTER, and FRIEDHELM WINKELMANN. 1966. Die LANGGARTNER, GEORG. 1964. Die Gallienpolitik der Pdpste im
Kirchengeschichte des Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus und 5. und 6. Jahrhundert: Eine Studie uber den apostolischen
ihre Quellen. Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Vikariat von Arles. Theophaneia 16 (Bonn).
altchristlichen Literatur 98 (Berlin). LECRIVAIN, C. 1888. Le senat romain depuis DioclMtien a
GITTI, ALBERTO. 1953. Ricerche sui rapporti tra i Vandali e Rome et c Constantinople (Paris).
l'Impero romano (Bari). LEDUQUE, A. 1966. Recherches topo-historiques sur l'Atrebatie
GIUNTA, FRANCESCO. 1958. Genserico e la Sicilia (Palermo). (Lille).
GORDON, COLIN D. 1960. The Age of Attila: Fifth-Century LEPPER, JOHANNES L. M. DE. 1941. De rebus gestis Bonifatii
Byzantium and the Barbarians (Ann Arbor). comitis A fricae et magistri militum (Tilburg-Breda).
GRAABAR, ANDRA. 1966. L'dge d'or de Justinien: De la mort de LESKY, ALB3IN. 1966. A History of Greek Literature. Trans-
Thiodose d l'Islam (Paris). lated by J. Willis and C. de Heer (New York).
LEVISON, WILHELM. 1904. "Bischof

MORAVCSIK,Germanus von Auxerre
GYULA. 1958. Byzantinoturcica (2 v., 2nd ed.,
und die Quellen zu seiner Geschichte."
Berlin). Neues Archiv der
GeselUschaft fur dltere deutscheMORAZZINI,
Geschichtskunde
ANDRP-. 1966. "Essai29: sur la pp. 95-175.
puissance maritime
LIZERAND, GEORGES. 1910. Aetius (Paris). des Vandales." Bulletin de l'Association Guillaume Bude, ser.
L'ORANGE, HANS P. 1965. Art Forms and Civic Life in the 4, 4: pp. 539-561.
Late Roman Empire. Translated by Dr. and Mrs. K. BergMOROSI, GIUSEPPE. 1882. L'invito di Eudossia a Genserico:
(Princeton). Studio critico (Florence).
LOT, FERDINAND. 1938. "Un dipl6me de Clovis confirmatif
MtLLER, C. (ed.). 1841-1870. Fragmenta historicorum grae-
d'une donation de patrice romain." Revue beige de philologiecorum (5 v., Paris).
et d'histoire 17: pp. 906-911. This article will be reprintedMUSSET,
in LUCIEN. 1965. Les invasions: Les vagues germaniques.
a forthcoming volume of a collection of the historical writingsNouvelle Clio: L'histoire et ses problemes 12 (Paris).
of Lot. Cf. Recueil des travaux historiques de Ferdinand Lot,
NIEBHUR, B. G. (ed.). 1823. Merobaudis carminum orationisque
Centre de Recherches d'Histoire et de Philologie de la IVereliquiae (St. Gall).
Section de l'1cole pratique des Hautes Etudes V: Hautes- 1824. Fl. Merobaudis carminum panegyrique reliquiae
dtudes m6di6vales et modernes 4 (Paris and Geneva, 1968)(2nd ed., Bonn).
1: p. 147, no. 56. NIMAL, PIERRE. 1965. "Remarques sur les origines antiques
- 1967. La Gaule: Les fondements ethniques, sociaux et de Bapaume." Revue du Nord 47: pp. 635-638.
politiques de la nation franfaise, edited by P.-M. Duval (2nd
- 1966. Naissance de Bapaume: Recherches sur les origines
ed., Paris). et la formation de la ville (Bapaume).
LowE, E. A. (ed.). 1934-1966. Codices latini antiquiores: A NORDEN, EDUARD. 1898. Die antike Kunstprosa vom VI.
Paleographical Guide to Latin Manuscripts Prior to the Ninth Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance (2 v., Leipzig).
Century (11 v. to date, Oxford). OLAJOS, TERPZIA. 1966. "Merobaudes Muivei (The Works of
LOYEN, ANDRP. 1934. "Les d6buts du royaume wisigoth de Merobaudes)." Antik Tanulmanyok 13: pp. 172-188.
Toulouse." Revue des etudes latines 12: pp. 406-415. OOST, STEWART I. 1964. "Atius and Majorian." Classical
- 1942. Recherches historiques sur les panegyriques de Sidoine Philology 59: pp. 23-29.
Apollinaire. Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des hautes etudes;- 1965. "Some Problems in the History of Galla Placidia."
Sciences historiques et philologiques 285 (Paris). Classical Philology 60: pp. 1-10.
- 1943. Sidoine Apollinaire et 'esprit pre'cieux en Gaule aux - 1968. "Galla Placidia and the Law." Classical Philology
derniers jours de l'Empire. Collection d'etudes latines publi6e 63: pp. 114-121.
par la Societ6 des Etudes latines, ser. scientifique 20 (Paris).- ~ 1968. Galla Placidia Augusta: A Biographical Essay
- 1944. "A la recherche du 'Vicus Helena.' " Revue des (Chicago and London).
etudes anciennes 46: pp. 121-134. ORS, ALVARO D'. 1955. Plinio el Joven: Panegirico de Trajano
MCDONALD, W. J., et al. (eds.). 1967. New Catholic Encyclo-
(Madrid).
pedia (15 v., New York). PALADINI, MARIA L. 1961. "La 'gratiarum actio' dei consoli
MAC MULLEN, RAMSAY. 1966. Enemies of the Roman Order: in Roma attraverso la testimonianza di Plinio il Giovane."
Treason, Unrest and Alienation in the Empire (Cambridge,
Historia 10: pp. 356-374.
Mass.). PAVLOVSKIS, ZOJA. 1967. "From Statius to Ennodius: A Brief
MALcOvATI, ENRICA. 1952. Plinio il Giovane: II panegirico di of Prose Prefaces to Poems." Rendiconti dell'Istituto
History
Traiano (Florence). lombardo, Classe di lettere e scienze morali e storiche 101: pp.
MASUR, INGEBORG. 1952. Die Vertrage der germanischen535-567.
Staimme. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Freie Universitat
PEERLKAMP, P. HOFMAN. 1826. Review of Fl. Merobaudis
(Berlin). carminum panegyrique reliquiae, 2nd ed. by B. G. Niebuhr.
MAZZARINO, SANTO. 1942. Stilicone: La crisi imperiale dopo Bibliotheca critica nova 2: pp. 105-111.
Teodosio. Studi pubblicati dal R. Istituto italiano per la PERRIN, ODET. 1968. Les Burgondes: Leur histoire, des origines
Storia antica 3 (Rome). a la fin du premier Royaume (534); Contribution a l'histoire des
- 1962. "Si puo parlare di rivoluzione sociale alla fine del Invasions (Neuchatel).
mondo antico?" ni passaggio dall' antichita al medioevo inPETRIKOVITS, HARALD VON. 1938. "Reichs-, Macht-, und
Occidente (Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di Studi Volktumsgrenze am linken Niederrhein im 3. und 4. Jahr-
sull' alto Medioevo 9, Spoleto), pp. 410-425, with discussion hundert n. Chr." Festschrift fuir August Oxe' zum 75. Geburtstag
on pp. 434-445. 23. Juli 1938 (Darmstadt), pp. 220-240.
- 1966. The End of the Ancient World, translated by G.
PICOTTI, G. B. 1928. "Il 'patricius' nell'ultima eta imperiale
Holmes (London). e nei primi regni barbarici d'Italia." Archivio storico italiano,
MELONI, PIERO. 1958. L'amministrazione della Sardegna ser.
da 7, 9: pp. 3-80.
Augusto all'invasione vandalica (Rome). PIGANIOL, ANDRk. 1964. Le sac de Rome (Paris).
MESLIN, MICHEL. 1966. Review of Constance de Lyon: Vie de
POTTHAST, AUGUST. 1896. Bibliotheca historica medii aevi:
Saint Germain d'Auxerre, edited by R. Borius. Revue de
Wegweiser durch die Geschichtswerke des europaischen Mittela
i'histoire des religions 170: pp. 204-207. ters bis 1500 (2 v., 2nd ed., Berlin). The third edition of
- 1967. Les Ariens d'Occident, 335-430. Patristica sorbon-Potthast has not progressed far enough to include the items
ensia 8 (Paris). cited in the present work. Cf. Repertorium fontium historiae
Medii
- , and Jean-Remy Palanque. 1967. Le christianisme antique Aevi (2 v. to date, Rome, 1962-1967).
(Paris). PRINZ, FRIEDRICH. 1965. Fruhes Mdnchtum im Frankenreich:
MEYER, HELMUT. 1969. "Der Regierungsantritt Kaiser Major- Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien, den Rheinlanden und Bayern
ians." Byzantinische Zeitschrift 62: pp. 5-12. am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4. bis 8. Jahr-
M6csy, ANDREAS. 1964. "Der Name Flavius als Rangbezei- hundert) (Munich and Vienna).
chnung in der Spatanike." Akte des IV. internationalen QUASTEN, JOHANNES. 1951-1960. Patrology (3 v., Westminster,
Kongresses fir griechische und lateinische Epigraphik [Wien, 17. Md.).
bis 22. September 1962] (Vienna), pp. 257-263. RABY, F. J. E. 1957. A History of Secular Latin Poetry in the
MOMMSEN, THEODOR. 1901. "Aetius." Hermes 36: pp. 516- Middle Ages (2 v., 2nd ed., Oxford).
547. Reprinted in Gesammelte Schriften (8 v., Berlin, 1905-RADICE, BETTY. 1969. Pliny: Letters and Panegyricus (2 v.,
1913) 4: pp. 531-560. Cambridge, Mass.).
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 1971] BIBLIOGRAPHY 73
REINACH, JULIEN. 1956. "Pubert6 f6minine et mariage ro- TESTI-RASPONI, A. 1926. "Analecta ravennatia, I: Fram-
main." Revue historique de droit fransais et etranger, ser. 4, menti poetici di Merobaude." Felix Ravenna 31: pp. 43-47.
34: pp. 268-273. TEUFFEL, W. S., et al., 1910-1916. Geschichte der romischen
RICE, DAVID TALBOT. 1965-1968. "On the Date of the Mosaic Literatur (3 v., 6th ed., Berlin and Leipzig).
Floor of the Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors at Thesaurus linguae latinae. 1900- (Leipzig).
Constantinople." Xapta-rptop ets 'Apao-&qtov K. 'OpXA&v5ovJ (4 THOMPSON, E. A. 1948. A History of Attila and the Huns
v., Athens) 1: pp. 1-5. (Oxford).
ROMANELLI, PIETRO. 1959. Storia delle provincie romane dell' 1952. "Peasant Revolts in Late Roman Gaul and Spain."
Africa. Studi pubblicati dall'Istituto italiano per la Storia Past and Present 2: pp. 11-23.
antica 14 (Rome). 1956. "The Settlement of the Barbarians in Southern
ROSCHER, W. H. (ed.). 1884-1937. Ausfiihrliches Lexikon der Gaul." Jour. Roman Studies 46: pp. 65-75.
griechischen und rdmischen Mythologie (7 v., Leipzig). 1956. "Zosimus on the End of Roman Britain." Antiquity
RUGGINI, LELLIA. 1962. "Fonti, problemi e studi sull'eta di 30: pp. 163-167.
Galla Placidia." Athenaeum, ser. 2, 40: pp. 373-391. 1957. "A Chronological Note on St. Germanus of Auxerre."
SCHANZ, M., C. Hosius and G. KRtTGER. 1890-1920. Geschichte Analecta bollandiana 75: pp. 135-138.
der romischen Litteratur bis zum Gesetzgebungswerk des Kaisers - 1963. "The Visigoths from Fritigern to Euric." Historia
Justinian (4 v., Munich). 12: pp. 105-126.
SCHMIDT, LUDWIG. 1903. "Zur Geschichte der Wandalen." - 1965. The Early Germans (Oxford).
Byzantinische Zeitschrift 12: pp. 601-603. TRICCA, A. 1915. "Evagrio e la sua fonte piu importante
1934-1940. Geschichte der deutschen Stdmme bis zum Procopio." Roma e l'Oriente 10: pp. 129-145. Part of a
Ausgang der Volkerwanderung (2 v., 2nd ed., Munich). series.
1942. "Aus den Anfdngen des salfrankischen Konigtums." ULRIcH-BANSA, OSCAR. 1949. Moneta mediolanensis [352-498]
Klio 34: pp. 306-327. (Venice).
1953. Histoire des Vandales. Translated by H. E. del VARADY, LASZLO. 1962. "Zur Klarstellung der zwei Hydatius-
Medico (Paris). Stellen." Helikon 2: pp. 259-263.
VERLINDEN, CHARLES. 1946. "DeFrankenenAetius: Kritische
SCH6NFELD, MORITZ. 1911. Wdrterbuch der altgermanischen
Personen- und Volkernamen nach der Ueberlieferung des klassi- bijdrage tot de chronologie van den opmarsch der Franken
schen Altertums bearbeitet (Heidelberg). in Belgie en Noord-Frankrijk." Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis
der Nederlanden 1: pp. 1-15.
SEECK, OTTO. 1919. Regesten der Kaiser und Papste fur die
1954. "Frankish Colonization: A New Approach." Trans-
Jahre 311 bis 476 n. Chr. (Stuttgart).
actions of the Royal Historical Society, ser. 5, 4: pp. 1-17.
1897-1921. Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt
- 1955. Les origtnes de la frontiere linguistique en Belgique
(6 v., Berlin).
et la colonisation franque (Brussels).
SESTON, WILLIAM. 1961-1965. "Verfall des r6mischen Reiches
WACKWITZ, PETER. 1964-1965. Gab es ein Burgunderreich in
im Westen; Die Volkerwanderung." Propylaen- Weltgeschichte:
Eine Universalgeschichte, edited by G. Mann and A. Heuss Worms? Der Wormsgau, Beiheft 20 and 21 (2 v., Worms).
(11 v., Berlin) 4: pp. 487-603. WALLACE-HADRILL, JOHN M. 1961-1962. "Gothia and Ro-
mania." Bull. John Rylands Library 44: pp. 213-237. Re-
SEYFARTH, WOLFGANG. 1960. Neue sowjetische Beitrdge zu
printed in the author's The Long-Haired Kings and Other
einigen Problemen der alten Geschichte: Das Problem der Bagau-
Studies in Frankish History (London, 1962), pp. 25-48.
den und die Frage derfreien Lohnarbeit in neuem Lichte. Leben-
WEIJNEN, A. 1965. "De Franken in de geschiedenis der
diges Altertum: Populare Schriftenreihe fur Altertumswissen-
Nederlanden." Frankisch, Merovingisch, Karolingisch Studies
schaft 3 (Berlin).
(Assen), pp. 1-9.
SHERWIN-WHITE, A. N. 1966. The Letters of Pliny: A Histori-
WILL, ERPNEST. 1966. "Remarques sur la fin de la domination
cal and Social Commentary (Oxford).
SIRAGO, VITO A. 1961. Galla Placidia e la trasformazione politica romaine dans le Nord de la Gaule." Revue du Nord 48: pp.
517-534.
dell'Occidente. Universite de Louvain: Recueil de travaux
WIRTH, GERHARD. 1967. "Zur Frage der f6derierten Staaten
d'histoire et de philologie ser. 4, 25 (Louvain).
SINNIGEN, WILLIAM G. 1963. "Comites consistoriani in Ostro- in der spateren r6mischen Kaiserzeit." Historia 16: pp.
231-251.
gothic Italy." Classica et medievalia 24: pp. 158-165.
SIRMOND, JACQUES (ed.). 1614. C. Sollii Apollinaris Sidonji WURM, GUSTAV. 1844. De rebus gestis Aetii (Bonn).
Arvernorum opera (Paris). ZACOS, G., and A. VEGLERY. 1959. "An Unknown Solidus of
SIROTENKO, V. T. 1968. "The Battle of the Masses in the Anastasios I." Spink and Son's Numismatic Circular 67: pp.
154-155.
Roman Empire against the Barbarians." In Russian, sum-
marized in Bibliotheca classica orientalis 13 (1968): pp. 172-177. - 1960. "Marriage Solidi of the Fifth Century." Spink and
Son's Numismatic Circular 68: pp. 73-74.
SOUTER, ALEXANDER. 1949. A Glossary of Later Latin to 600
A. D. (Oxford). ZANGEMEISTER, C., and W. WATTENBACH. 1879. Exempla
codicum latinorum litteris maiusculis scriptorum: Supplemen-
STENGERS, JEAN. 1959. La formation de la frontiere linguistique
tum continens tabulas LI-LXII (Heidelberg).
en Belgique, ou de la ligitimitW de l'hypothUse historique. Collec-
tion Latomus 41 (Brussels).
STEIN, ERNST. 1949-1959. Histoire du Bas-Empire, edited by ADDENDUM
J.-R. Palanque (2 v., 2nd ed., Paris).
A number of pertinent works have appeared or come to my
STROBEL, AUGUST. 1963. "Sauglings- und Kindertaufe in der
attention after the present monograph went to press. The follow-
altesten Kirche." Begruindung und Gebrauch der heiligen Taufe,
ing are the most important:
edited by Otto Perels (Berlin and Hamburg), pp. 7-69.
STROHEKER, KARL F. 1963. "Spanische Senatoren der spatro- BACHRACH, BERNARD S. 1969. "Another Look at the Bar-
mischen und westgotischen Zeit." Madrider Mitteilungen 4: barian Settlement in Southern Gaul." Traditio 25: pp. 354-
pp. 107-132. Reprinted in the author's Germanentum und 358. Bachrach reinforces Wallace-Hadrill's criticism of
Spdtantike (Zuirich, 1965), pp. 54-87. Thompson's contention (third bibliographical entry, above)
SUNDWALL, JOHANNES. 1915. Westromische Studien (Berlin). that in settling barbarians in southern Gaul the Romans were
SZADECZKY-KARDOSS, SAMU. 1961. "Zur Interpretation zweier concerned primarily with containing the Bacaudae in Armorica.
Hydatius-Stellen." Helikon 1: pp. 148-152. Bachrach suggests that the Romans settled various barbarian
peoples there not only to check the Bacaudae, but to prevent MONTI, S. 1966. "Per l'esegesi dei carmi 1 e 2 di Merobaude."
any one group from becoming too strong in this key area. Rendiconti della R. Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti
GRAND, ROGER, and SUZANNE DUPARC. 1965. Recherches sur di Napoli, ser. 2, 41: pp. 3-21. This article is unavailable to me
l'origine des Francs (Paris). On pp. 58-61 and 130-131 the at present, but from the summary in Byzantinische Zeitschrift
authors discuss the movements of the Ripuarian and Salian 62 (1969): p. 468, it appears that the author adopts the inter-
Franks during the first half of the fifth century. They pretation that Carmina I and II are ekphraseis of a work of art
generally follow the interpretations of Verlinden, and thus, for
depicting, notably, Valentinian III and Eudoxia; the work was
example, date the engagement at Vicus Helena to 446.
located in a room of the imperial palace at Ravenna.
HOPKINS, M. K. 1964-1965. "The Age of Roman Girls at
ZOLLNER, ERICH. 1970. Geschichte der Franken bis zur Mitte
Marriage." Population Studies 18: pp. 309-327. Using literary
and epigraphical evidence Hopkins strengthens the contention des sechsten Jahrhunderts (Munich). This work is part of the
of Durry that the Romans practiced marriage on girls who had Geschichte der deutschen Stdmme begun by Ludwig Schmidt.
not reached puberty. Hopkins suggests that in such marriages On pp. 27-32 there is a thorough discussion of the movements
immediate consummation was more the rule than the exception. of the Franks in the middle years of the fifth century.
INDEX
Achilles, 11, 23, 24, 32, 60, 61 talus, 57; sacks Rome, 56-58 passim; Burgundians: fight with Aetius, 42, 45,
Ad Laureta, 19, 27 death of, 57 48; massacred by Huns, 45; conclude
Ad Palmam, 29 Albinus, 29 treaty with Aetius, 42, 4546; settled
Adriatic Sea, 57 Allecto, 55 in Savoy, 45-46; help Aetius against
Aetius, Flavius: birthdate of, 30; infancy Alps: Merobaudes' campaigns in, 9, 40; Attila, 46
of, 56; reputation as a war leader, 56; Bacaudae in, 9, 40, 48 Bury, J. B., 20, 22, 23
compared with Julius Caesar, 58; wives Ammianus Marcellinus, 38 Byzacene, 52, 53
of, 30-32; sons of, 29-30; superior and Anaolsus, 41
associate of Merobaudes, 7, 10, 36, 37- Anastasius I, Eastern Roman Emperor, Caesar. See Julius Caesar, Gaius
38; fosters Merobaudes' career, 10, 12, 36 Camaracum (Cambrai), 43-44
34, 36, 38, 40, 63; honored by Mero- Apollo, 11, 14, 15, 22, 28, 60, 66, 68 Camuzat, Nicholas, 7, 35-36
baudes, 8, 10, 11, 12-15, 30, 32-59 pas- Aquitanica II, 50, 58 Capitoline Hill, 55
sim, 61, 62-68 passim; statue and in- Araceli, 10 Carpilio, Father-in-law of Aetius, 30, 31
scription honoring him, 38-39; consul- Arianism, 31, 32 Carpilio, Elder Son of Aetius, 29, 30, 31,
ates of, 9, 10, 32, 36, 38, 39, 49, 55, 58; Ariovistus, 58 42
at dedication of Theodosias Code, 37; Arles, 41 Carthage: Vandal occupation of, 21, 23,
campaigns against barbarians, 54; cam- Armorica: Bacaudae of, 9n19, 13, 44, 46- 51-52, 53, 54; chief granary of Rome,
paigns in Gaul, 29, 39, 45, 52, 54; hos- 50, 58, 64; settled by Alans, 48-49 52, 53; pagan temples destroyed in, 56;
tage of Huns, 30, 42; treaty with Huns, Art, Later Roman. See Later Roman site of captivity of younger Gaudentius,
29, 42; campaigns against Alamanni, Empire 29; possible site of marriage of Oly-
42; campaigns against Armorican Ba- Aspar, Flavius Ardabur, 52 brius, 26; site of exile of Valentinian
caudae, 47, 48-50, 58; settles Alans in Asturius, 8, 10 III's family, 25, 26
Armorica, 48-49; secures help of Ba- Athaulf, King of Visigoths, 54n123, 57 Carthaginians, 13, 51, 65
caudae against Attila, 50; hostage of Athenians, 12, 62 Catalaunian Fields, Battle of, 46
Alaric, 30, 39, 56-58; compaigns Attalus, Priscus, 57 Catholicism, 31
against Visigoths, 15, 39, 41, 50-51, 58- Attila, King of Huns: receives Carpilio Cato, 12, 62
59, 67-68; directs liberation of Narbo as hostage, 29, 42; Eudoxius' flight to, Catullus, 17, 19, 23
from Visigothic siege, 37, 50-51; fights 44, 50; conspiracy with Honoria, 22; Caucasus Mountains, 13, 64
Visigoths at Mons colubrarius, 13, 41, invasion of Gaul, 22, 31, 45, 50 Celts, 46, 48
64; fights Anaolsus near Arles, 41; di- Augusta Treverorum (Trier), 43, 45 Ceres, 13, 64
rects siege of Visigothic fort, 58-59; Augustine, Saint, 31 Christ, Jesus, 15-16, 69
oath of victory over Visigoths, 39; con- Aureliana (Orleans), 46, 48 Civitas Atrebatum, 44
cludes treaty with Visigoths, 29, 31, Ausonius, 33 Claudian: panegyrics to Stilicho, 34; uses
58-59; campaigns against Burgundians, Autessiodurum (Auxerre), 44, 49 concilia deorum in his poetry, 55; in-
42, 45, 48; concludes treaty with Bur- Autun, 35 fluence on, Merobaudes, 32-33, 34, 55
gundians, 4546; secures help of Bur- Avitus, Roman Emperor, 50-51, 59 Claudius Mamertinus, 33
gundians against Attila, 46; campaigns Clodio, King of Salian Franks, 43-45
against Franks, 4245; victory over Bacauda, 48. See also Bacaudae Clovis I, Merovingian King, 35, 36
and treaty with Ripuarians, 43, 45; Bacaudae: of Alps, 9, 40, 48; in Spain, Codex sangallensis, 7, 8, 28, 32
Coloni, 46
secures some Ripuarian help against 10, 37, 46, 48, 50; of Armorica, 9n19,
Attila, 43; victory over and treaty with 13, 44, 46-50, 58, 64; chronological and Colonia Agrippina (Cologne), 43
geographical extent of their activity,
Concilia deorum, 55-56
Salians, 4345; secures Salian help
against Attila, 45; role in Romano- 46-50; nature and composition of, 46- Consistory, Sacred, 9, 28-29, 40
Vandal treaty of 442, 54; possibly 50; relations with neighboring bar- Constantine I, Roman Emperor, 33, 35
mints coins at Trier, 43, 45; his pro- barians, 47-48; fight against Aetius
Constantius of Lyons, 44, 49
cessus consularis in Rome, 55; his am-
Constantine Manasses, 16
and his lieutenants, 48-50; possibly at-
bitions for imperial succession, 54; ar- tack Tours, 44, 49; appeal to St. Ger- Constantinople: Great Palace of the Em-
ranges betrothal of Gaudentius and manus, 49; their status when Attila perors at, 16; wedding of Valentinian
Placidia, 25, 30, 54; removes Majorian invaded Gaul, 50; help Aetius against III and Eudoxia at, 20, 21-22, 37;
as candidate for imperial succession, Attila, 50 Merobaudes possibly travels to, 41;
25, 43; quarrel with Albinus, 29; rela- Baetis River, 8
residence of Olybrius at, 26; used as
tions with senatorial aristocracy, 39; Balkan Peninsula, 57
place of refuge by Eudoxia and Pla-
cidia, 26
assassinated by Valentinian III, 25 Baptism: Late Roman theory and prac-
Consulate, 34-35
Africa Proconsularis, 52, 53 tice of, 24-25, 27, 32 Curia, 38
Agrypnius Volusianus, Rufius Antonius, Barbarians: invade Gaul, 57; invade
37 Spain, 10; relations with Bacaudae, 47-
Dalmatia, 36, 37, 40-41
Alamanni, 42 48; Germanic, 15, 42, 53, 58, 67
Alans, 48-49 Belgica I and II, 45
Danube River, 13, 4142, 64
Alaric, King of Visigoths: poetic refer- Bellona, 13, 65 Decius Mus, Publius, 14, 66
ences to, 15, 67; invasions of Italy, 57- Betrothal: Roman law and practice of, Dessau, H., 22
58; fights Stilicho, 57; treaty with 24, 25 Dido (Elissa), 13, 51, 65
Stilicho, 56-58; takes Aetius hostage, Black Sea, 42, 55 Dispargum (Duisburg?), 43
30, 39, 56-58; negotiates with Honorius Boethius, 9 Domitian, Roman Emperor, 19
and Senate, 57-58; causes Attalus to be Boniface, Count, 30-31 Durostorum, 56
proclaimed emperor, 57; deposes At- Biicheler, F., 28 Durry, M., 26
75
Ekphrasis: as a general literary
colubrarius,device,
41; Bacaudae in, 46-50 pas- Hydatius: his evidence for Placidia's
16-19; Merobaudes' use of, 16-28 passim; Frankish invasions of, 43 marriage, 25-26; testimony regarding
sim Ge (Earth), 16 Aetius' campaigns against Visigoths,
Ensslin, WV., 35, 37 Geiseric, King of Vandals: poetic refer- 41, 51; testimony concerning Mero-
Enyo, 14, 55, 65 ences to, 13, 51, 65; leads Vandal in- baudes, 37, 39
Eudocia, Wife of Theodosius II, 20 vasion of North Africa, 51-52; diplo-
Eudocia, Elder Daughter of Valentinian matic relations with Aspar, 52; as Illyricum, 57, 58
III: poetic references to, 11, 60; birth foederatus in Numidia, 52-53; cap- Italy, 29, 51, 52, 54, 57
of, 9, 23, 25; age at the composition of tures Carthage, 51-52, 54; raids in wes- luthungi, 42
Carmen7 I, 23, 24; represented on and tern and eastern Mediterranean, 52, 53;
suggested by Ravenna palace mosaic, alleged pact with Theodosius II, 52; Jason, 57
19, 23, 27, 28; betrothed to Huniric, 23- treaty with West confirning possession
John, Usurper, 20, 24
24, 25, 27, 28, 52-54; taken captive to of Carthage, 21, 51-54; surrenders
John of Antioch, 25n93, 30, 31
Carthage, 24, 25; married to Huniric, Huniric as hostage, 21; agrees to be-
Jordanes, 38-39, 50, 59
24 trothal of Huniric and Eudocia, 24, 28,
Jovius, 56, 57
Eudoxia, Licinia, Wife of Valentinian 52-54; legal status as of 442, 53-54;
Julian II, Roman Emperor, 33
III: suggested by and represented on ambitions for imperial succession, 54;
Julius Caesar, Gaius: poetic references to,
Ravenna palace mosaic, 11, 16-20 pas- sacks Rome, 24, 25, 26, 29; takes cap-
13, 15, 30n17, 58, 64, 67; campaigns
sim, 22, 23, 27-28, 60; betrothed to tives back to Carthage, 24, 25, 26, 29;
against Ariovistus, 58
Valentinian III, 24; marries Valentin- marries Eudocia to Huniric, 24; pos-
Jupiter, 14, 66
ian III at Constantinople, 21-22, 23, sibly arranges marriage of Olybrius to
36; her wedding possibly honored by Placidia, 26; releases Eudoxia and Pla-
Laeti, 46
Merobaudes, 9, 36-37; proclaimed Em- cidia, 26
Larisa, City in Thessaly, 11, 23, 60
press at Ravenna, 23; on an inscription Geminus, 18n26
Larisa, Thessalian nymph, 23
erected by Galla Placidia, 22; taken Germanus, Saint, Bishop of Auxerre: Later Roman Empire: art of, 17, 18, 20,
captive to Carthage, 24, 25; takes ref- Bacaudic appeal to, 49; pleads case of 21, 22, 27; diplomacy in, 53; fatalism
uge at Constantinople, 26 Bacaudae at Ravenna, 49; death of, 44,
in, 51; ideal of restitutor orbis in, 54;
Eudoxius, 44, 50 49 imperial succession in, 31, 54; peasant
Eugenius, 22 Gironde River, 46 movements in, 46-S50; victory proces-
Evagrius, 26
Glabrio Faustus, Anicius Acilius: poem sions in, 55; Western sector of, 7
of Merobaudes possibly dedicated to, 9, Latins (Romans), 13, 65
Fabii Maximi, 14, 66
11, 28-29, 61; career runs parallel to Latium: poetic references to, 11-15 pas-
Fabricius, Georg, 8-9
that of Merobaudes, 28-29; possible sim, 29, 55, 57, 61-68 passim
Fates, 13, 14, 65, 66
friend of Merobaudes, 28-29, 37; role Latona, 11, 22, 60
Faustus. See Glabrio Faustus, Anicius in wedding of Valentinian III, 37 Leo I, Pope, 30n9
Acilius
Goar, King of Alans, 48-49 Leo I, Roman Emperor, 26
Flavius, Honorific Title, 9, 40
Goths: rhetorical or poetic references to, Levison, W., 49
Foederati, 50, 52, 53
12, 13, 14, 47, 62, 64, 67; Arianism of, Liberty, Atrium of, 38
France, 44
31 Libya, 13, 51, 65
Franks: groups of, 42-43; their fight and Litorius, 48, 50-51, 58-59
Gratian, Roman Emperor, 7, 33, 36
diplomatic relations with Aetius, 42-45. Loire River, 45, 48
See also Merovingian, Ripuarian, and Gratiarum actio, 10, 33, 34-35
Lot, F., 35
Salian Franks Gregory of Tours, 30-31, 32, 43
Lucina, 11, 62
Frigeridus, Renatus Profuturus, 30, 31,Grosjean, P., 49 Luna, 11, 22, 60
38-39, 56, 57 Gundahar, Burgundian King, 45 Lupus, Bishop of Troyes, 8n5
Furies, 55-56 Lyons, 44, 49
Harmony: suggested by Ravenna palace
Galla Placidia, Dowager Empress: exile mosaic, 11, 16, 17, 60
Macedonius, 18n26
of, 20; devotion to Christianity, 16; Heraclian, 57
Magister utriusque militiae, Office of, 37
suggested by Ravenna palace mosaic, Hispania Tarraconensis, 8, 10
Majorian, Roman Emperor: Sidonius'
11, 19, 22, 60; erects inscription which Honoria, Justa Grata: suggested by Ra- panegyric to, 44; defense of Tours, 44-
lists her family, 22; hears St. Germanus venna palace mosaic, 11, 19, 22, 60; on 45, 49; at engagement at vicus Helena,
argue case of Bacaudae, 49 inscription set up by Galla Placidia, 43-45; intended husband of Placidia,
Gallia Narbonensis, 50 22; affair with Eugenius, 22; conspir- 25; exile of, 25, 43-44
Gallia Ulterior, 48 acy with Attila, 22; exile, 22-23 Malalas, John, 26
Gallic Chronicle, 23, 44 Honorius, Western Emperor: honored by Mantaniacum, Monastery of, 7, 35, 36
Gaudentius, Father of Aetius, 14, 56, 66 Claudian, 32; quarrel with Galla Pla- Marcellinus, Count, 22, 30-31, 45
Gaudentius, Younger Son of Aetius: bap- cidia, 20; activities during Alaric's in- Marcian, Roman Emperor, 26
tism of, 29n7, 32; place and date of vasion of Italy, 57; death of, 20
Mark the Deacon, 25
birth, 29-30; first birthday honored by Huniric, King of Vandals: exile at Ra- Marriage: Roman law and practice of,
Merobaudes, 9, 11-12, 29-30, 61-62; venna, 21, 53; represented on Ravenna
26, 30
betrothed to Placidia, 25, 29-30, 31, 54; palace mosaic, 11, 21, 22, 60; betrothed
Mars: poetic references to, 11-15 passim,
taken captive to Carthage, 29 to Eudocia, 24, 25, 27, 28, 52-54; mar-
55, 61-68 passim
Gaul: Merobaudes' possession of property ried to Eudocia, 24
Marxism: perspective on Late Roman
in, 7; poetic references to, 13, 15, 64, Huns: poetic references to, 13, 14, 55, 64,
peasant revolts, 47
67; the elder Gaudentius commands 65; stamping grounds around Black
Sea, 42; take Aetius as hostage, 30, 42; Mauretania Caesariensis, 52
troops in, 56; barbarian invasions of,
57; Aetius' campaigns in, 29, 39, 45, 52, treaty with Aetius, 29; massacre Bur- Mauretania Sitifensis, 52
54, 58-59; Attila's invasion of, 50; Visi- gundians, 45; invasion of Eastern Ro- Maximian, Roman Emperor, 48
gothic activity in, 50-51; site of Mons man Empire, 52 Mediterranean Sea, 50, 52
VOL. 61, PT. 1, 19711 INDEX 77
Merobaudes, Consul during the Reign of Palladius, 25 Salian Franks: movements of, 4345; tra-
Gratian, 7, 35-36 Panegyric: types of, 33; general charac- ditions for, 43; defeated at vicus
Merobaudes, Dux Aegypti, 36n40 ter of, 33, 40; its traditions influence Helena, 43-45; allies of Aetius during
Merobaudes, Flavius: Frankish origins Merobaudes, 32-35 passim, 38, 40 Attila's invasion of Gaul, 45
of, 7, 8, 35; Gallic connections of, 7, Panegyrici latini, 33 Salona: Merobaudes travels to, 13, 36,
8; donation to Monastery of Mantania- Pannonia I, 42 40-41, 64
cum, 7, 35-36; uncertain inscription pos- Patriciate: characteristics of, 10, 35-37 Santa Croce, Church of, at Ravenna, 27
sibly referring to, 10n38; resident of passim; Merobaudes' receipt of, 10, 35- Sapaudia (Savoy), 45-46
Spain, 8, 37; son-in-law of Asturius, 36 Sardinia, 52, 53
8, 10; wife of, 10; departs from Spain Peace, Goddess, 13, 65 Scythia: poetic references to, 13, 14, 54,
for Rome and Ravenna, 8; surviving Pelagia: second wife of Aetius, 11-12, 64-67 passim; province of, 56
works, 8-10, 16-59 passim; possible 30-32, 61-62 Seine, Baie de la, 48
works, 9, 10n35, 36-37, 39, 40; range Peleus, 11, 17, 23, 60 Senate: ranking in, 9, 10, 39, 40; nego-
of literary activity, 8-9; influenced by tiates with Alaric, 57-58; proclaims
Persia: poetic reference to, 11, 61
past poetic traditions, 29, 32-33, 34, 51, Attalus Emperor, 57; source of rhetor-
Petronius Maximus, Roman Emperor, 25,
55-56; influenced by past prose tra- ical sketches of Aetius, 38-39; erects
26
ditions, 32-35 passim, 38, 41; use of statue and inscription honoring Aetius,
Placidia, Younger Daughter of Valentin-
ekphrasis, 16-29 passim; use of tradi- 38-39
tion of gratiarum actio, 33-35; influence ian III: birth and baptism of, 9, 11,
Seneca the Younger, 33
on later writers, 38-39; devotion to 24-25, 26, 27-28, 32, 60; represented
Sicily, 52, 53
on Ravenna palace mosaic, 11, 19, 23,
Christianity, 8, 32, 36; use of pagan Sidonius Apollinaris: panegyrics to Avi-
mixed with Christian imagery, 16n2, 24, 27-28, 60; intended wife of Major-
tus and Majorian, 44, 50; testimony
27, 32; refers to Aetius' family and ian, 25; betrothed to Gaudentius, 25,
regarding younger Gaudentius' mother,
deeds, 29-32, 38-39, 4246, 48-51, 55, 29-30, 54; married to Palladius, 25-27;
29, 30-32; testimony concerning Mero-
56-59; discusses Vandal-Roman rela- married to Olybrius, 25-26; taken cap-
baudes, 8, 39; evidence for the siege of
tions, 23-24, 28, 51-54; alludes to bap- tive to Carthage, 24-26 passim; takes
Narbo, 50-51; source for the engage-
refuge at Constantinople, 26
tism of Placidia, 24-28; refers to Ba- ment at vicus Helena, 43-44
caudae, 46-50, 58; campaigns in Alps, Pliny the Younger, 33
Sigebert of Gembloux, 45
9, 40; presumably comes rei militaris Pollentia, Battle of, 57, 58 Somme River, 43-44, 45, 46
or dux, 9, 40; admitted to Senate, 9, Poseidon, 23 Spain: poetic and rhetorical references
12, 34, 35, 39, 63; presumably uir claris- Priscus of Panium, 25, 26, 52 to, 12, 13, 63, 64; senatorial aristocracy
simus, 9, 39; vir spectabilis, 9, 36, 37, Processus consularis, 13, 55, 65 of, 8, 10; Merobaudes' residence in, 8,
39, 40; Count of the Consistory, 9, 28- Procopius of Caesarea, 52-53 37; Merobaudes' and Asturius' cam-
29, 36, 37, 40; possible friend of Faus- Prosper, 25, 50, 53, 59 paigns in, 10, 37-38, 40; Bacaudae in,
tus, 28-29, 37; presumably comes primi 46, 48, 50; Vandals depart from, 52
Pseudo-Dexter, 8n9
ordinis, 9, 40; receives honorific name Sparta: poetic and rhetorical references
Pyrenees Mountains, 50
Flavius, 9, 40; bronze statue and in- to, 11, 12, 61, 62
scription honoring, 8, 9, 12, 34, 36, 39- Statius, 19, 29
40, 63; travels to Dalmatian Coast and Quirinus, 12, 15, 62, 68
Stein, E., 44
perhaps farther East, 12, 13, 33, 36, 37, Stilicho, Generalissimo Under Honorius,
40-41, 63, 64; possible campaigns Ravenna: imperial palace at, 16-19 pas- 32, 34, 57-58
against Bacaudae in Armorica, 9n19; sim, 27; Merobaudes at, 8; departure Styx, River of the, 11, 32, 61
magister utriusque militiae in Spain, 8, of Valentinian III and his wedding Suebi, 58
9-10, 12, 37-38, 40, 63; receives title party from, 21; Eudoxia proclaimed Symmachus, 33
of patricius from Theodosius II, 7, 10, Empress at, 23; Huniric a hostage at,
12, 34, 35-38, 39, 63; presumably vir 21, 53; St. Germanus at, 49 Tanais (Don) River, 13, 14, 64, 66
inlustris, 10; recalled from Spain, 10, Rhaetia, 42 Tarpeian Rock, 14, 67
37, 38; epitaph and burial place of, 10 Rhine River, 13, 41-43, 45, 46, 64 Testi-Rasponi, A., 19, 23, 27, 28
Merovingian Franks, 35, 36, 43 Rhiphaean Mountains, 13, 14, 55, 65 Theoderic I, King of Visigoths: siege of
Middle Ages, Early: feudalism in, 47 Rhone River, 50 Narbo, 50-51; absent from engagement
Moesia Inferior, 56
Ripuarian Franks: movements of, 4243; at Mons colubrarius, 13, 41, 64; absent
Mons colubrarius, Battle of, 13, 41, 64
capture Cologne and Trier, 43; Aetius from Aetius' siege of Visigothic fort,
Muses, 11, 61
defeats and forces treaty on, 43, 45; 59; treaty with Aetius, 31, 59
partial allies of Aetius during Attila's Theodosian Code, 29, 37
Narbo: Visigothic siege of, 37, 50-51 invasion of Gaul, 43 Theodosius I, Roman Emperor: honored
Nereus, 11, 60
Romanus, Saint, Bishop of Rheims, 35 in panegyric by Symmachus, 33; House
Niebuhr, B. G., 28-29, 32, 36
Rome: poetic references to, 11, 12, 13, 15, of, 16, 19, 24, 25, 28, 54
Nile River, 13, 65
42, 45, 51, 55, 58, 62, 65, 67; victory Theodosius II, Roman Emperor: baptism
Noricum, 42, 57
processions in, 55; sacked by Alaric, of, 25; brings about accession of Val-
North: poetic references to, 13, 14, 51,
56-58 passim; Merobaudes in, 8, 38; entinian III, 20; arranges betrothal and
65-67 passim
Faustus' home in, 29; erects statue marriage of Valentinian III and Eu-
North Africa, 21, 52-53, 57
honoring Merobaudes, 9, 12, 39-40, 63; doxia, 9, 21-22, 24, 36; coins of, 22, 43;
Northern Bear Star, 14, 65
the younger Gaudentius in, 29, 30; de- literary patronage of, 36; interest in
Numidia, 52
pendence on Carthage for grain, 52; West, 36, 37, 52; role in erection of
Aetius' statue erected in, 38; Valentin- statue in Merobaudes' honor, 39, 40;
Olybrius, Roman Emperor, 25-26 ian III in, 49; site of burial of Mero- awards Merobaudes title of patricius,
Oost, S. I., 21, 23 baudes, 10; Vandal sack of, 24, 25, 26, 10, 12, 34, 36, 38, 40, 63; not on Ra-
Orleans. See Aureliani 29 venna palace mosaic described by Mero-
Osiris, 13, 65 Rua, King of Huns, 42 baudes, 20
Ovid, 56 Rufinus, 55 Theophanes, 26
Thessaly, 11, 23, 60 of, 43; Novels of, 45; honored by Vandals: control Carthage and its hin-
Thetis: poetic references to, 11, 17, 23, Merobaudes, 7, 8, 9, 16-28 passim, 32, terland, 51-52; conduct raids through-
32, 60, 61-62 53; but not addressed in Merobaudes' out Mediterranean, 24, 52; legal status
Thompson, E. A., 49 prose oration, 34; Christianity of, 16, of, 52-54; sack Rome, 24, 25, 29
Thoringia, 43 17, 25, 32; exile and accession, 20; first Venus, 11, 61
Thrace: Merobaudes' possible travels to, treaty with Geiseric, 52-53; betrothal Vergil, 18, 19, 51
12, 36, 37, 40-41, 63 and marriage to Eudoxia, 21-22, 24, Verona, Battle of, 57, 58
Tibatto, 48, 49 36-37; oversees construction of palace Victory, Goddess of, 13, 55, 65
Tiber River, 11, 13, 14, 29, 61, 64, 65 ad Laureta, 19; promotes career of Vicus Helena, Battle of, 43-45
Titania, 15, 68 Merobaudes, 9, 12, 39-40, 63; but does Visigoths: poetic references to, 13, 15,
Tolosa (Toulouse), 58-59 not grant Merobaudes the patriciate, 64, 67-68; conclude treaty with Stilicho,
Tomis, 56 36; represented on Ravenna palace 56-58; receive Aetius as hostage, 56-
Tractus Armoricanus, 46, 48. See also mosaic(s), 11, 16-22 passim, 27-28, 58; sack Rome, 56-58 passim; activity
Armorica 60; recalls Merobaudes from Spain, 10, in Gaul, 5051; besiege Narbo, 37, 50-
Trajan, Roman Emperor: Pliny's pane- 37; concludes treaty with Geiseric con- 51; occasionally cooperate with Ba-
gyric to, 33; Forum of, 9, 36, 39 firming possession of Carthage, 21, 52- caudae, 47-48; frequently battle Aetius
Triumph: characteristics of, 55 54; agrees to betrothal of Eudocia and and his lieutenants, 39, 41, 50-51, 58-
Turnacum (Tournai), 43-44, 45 Huniric, 23-24, 28, 52-54; in Rome dur- 59; conclude treaty with Aetius, 29, 31,
Turones (Tours), 44 45, 49 ing Bacaudic disturbances, 49; makes 58-59
Tyrians. See Carthaginians plans for marriage of Placidia and Ma- Vitus, lOn32
Tyrrhenian Sea, 13, 64 jorian, 25; agrees to betrothal of Pla- Vollmer, F., 20, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 59
cidia and younger Gaudentius, 25, 54; Volusianus. See Agrypnius Volusianus
Valentinian I, Roman Emperor, 7, 36 rivalry with Aetius, 36, 54; assassinates Vulcan, 15, 68
Valentinian III (Flavius Placidus Valen- Aetius, 25; cancels betrothal of Gau-
World (personified), 11, 13, 14, 60, 64, 66
tinianus), Roman Emperor: play on his dentius and Placidia, 25; assassinated,
name by Merobaudes, 19; on inscrip- 25 Zonaras, John, 26
tion set up by Galla Placidia, 22; coins Valeria, 42 Zosimus, Count, 57-58

Flavius Merobaudes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flavius Merobaudes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flavius Merobaudes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the purpose of the document?

What is the purpose of the document?

What historical figures are mentioned in the document?

What historical figures are mentioned in the document?

Flavius Merobaudes: A Translation and Historical Commentary

Author(s): Frank M. Clover and Flavius Merobaudes

AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

FOR PROMOTING USEFUL KNOWLEDGE

NEW SERIES-VOLUME 61, PART 1

THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

Copyright ? 1971 by The American Philosophical Society

Library of Congress Catalog

A Translation and Historical Commentary

CONTENTS partly because of our limited knowledge of the fifth

TRANSLATION CARMEN III

latter half of the where their partial

VOLLMER'S TEXT OF MEROBAUDES

(MONUMENTA GERMANIAE HISTORICA: A UCTORES ANTIQUISSIMI 14: pp. 3-20)

desunt aliquot versus paginae et carminis Codex p. 260

incumbit foribus pictae Concordia mensae le r

p. 259 dest carminis primi unus, vix tres vermS.

dutnt quattuor, vix sex verss p. 256

Annus panditur ecce iam secundus

p. 255 dessnt 4 fere versus

desunt fere 4 verSUs p. 273

desunt fere 4 versus p. 270

deau fere 4 ver8icul p. 269

frg-. II B t)ui aestimator es, quam enormis

E (X) P (L) I (C) I (T) P (R) A (E) F (A) T (I) 0

Danuvii cum pace redit Tanainque furore

insessor Libyes quamvis fatalibus armis p. 258;

intercidit unum folium i. fere 56 versm et p. 268 fere versu 4 p. 268

desunt 4 vel 6 ver p. 267

.............. )es habitue, tege casside (vultus, .... a c " "o

interciderunt 2 folia i. fere 110 vers et p. 262 fere 4 versus p. 262

deunt 4 ml 5 rsus p. 261

ut vix prona novis erexit gressibus ora fin p. 268;

desa duae paginae i: fere 56 versus

as in caelum patremque redis rursusque perenni

LEVISON, WILHELM. 1904. "Bischof

You might also like