The Homoians in Gaul PDF

© Copyrighted Material
Chapter 14
The Homoians in Gaul
Uta Heil
m
.co
ate
The church in Gaul distanced itself very early from the Homoians,1 especially
hg
because of the works and writings of Hilary of Poitiers. At a synod in the
as
m
year 358 the Gallic bishops had already rejected the first theological draft of the
Homoians of Sirmium in 357.2 At another synod – which possibly took place
.co
in Paris at the beginning of 361 after Julian had been proclaimed Augustus in
ate
Gaul in February 360 – they dissociated themselves further from the decisions
hg
of the Homoian double synod in Rimini and Seleucia in 359 by defending the
as
m
Nicene keyword ‘same nature’/homousios and tried to contact other critics of
the Homoians in the east.3 Since that point Christianity in Gaul was considered
.co
‘Nicene’. Only because of the settlement of Visigoths and Burgundians in

ate
Gallic provinces was Homoian-‘Arian’ Christianity encountered and dealt with

hg
as
in the area again. But what is known about the Christianity of the Visigoths
m
and Burgundians?
The sources only provide a scant illustration since there are no sources from
.co
these gentes themselves, and the (Catholic) Gallic population did not pay enough
ate
attention or show enough interest to report on the inner conditions of the

hg
as
Visigoths or Burgundians. Although some outstanding bishops are known from

m
Gaul, statements concerning the Visigoths or Burgundians can only be found

occasionally. Likewise the canons of the (Catholic) synods mainly deal with their
.co
own organisational questions or disciplinary issues. One exception is the preserved

ate
writings of Avitus, who was bishop of Vienne during the greatest political expansion
hg
as
of the Burgundians around 500. His letters and a few surviving fragments of his
m
writings reveal an intense theological discourse, in particular with the Burgundian

.co
king Gundobad, and expose the controversial theological questions of the period
ate
(see third section below on the Burgundians in Gaul).

hg
as
m
.co
ate
1
On the Homoians see Chapter 4 (Uta Heil) in this volume.
hg
2
Cf. Hilarius Pictaviensis, Liber de synodis seu de fide orientalium 2, PL 10, pp. 481–82.
as
3
A written text from the synod is quoted by Hilarius Pictaviensis, Collectanea antiariana
Parisina A 1 (ed. Feder, CSEL 65, pp. 43–6).
© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

From Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher (eds), Arianism: Roman Heresy and Barbarian Creed, published by Ashgate
Publishing. See: http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781409446590
272 Arianism: Roman Heresy and Barbarian Creed
‘Great Invasion’ – The Rhine Crossing of 406
Probably on December 31, 406 a large group of Vandals, Suebi and Alans
crossed the Rhine near Mainz and reached northern Gaul. Battles ensued with
the Franks living in the area but they were defeated. As a result the Rhine border
was open and the so-called ‘Great Invasion’ took place. The consequences of
this event were massive and the invaders could no longer be simply repelled.
m
The Suebi and Vandals moved on to modern-day Spain after spending two years
.co
plundering Gaul. The Vandals later crossed over to North Africa. Similarly the
ate
Alans and Burgundians began to create their own kingdoms along the Rhine.
hg
The ‘Great Invasion’ of 406/407 was the decisive prelude to the creation of the
as
m
successor kingdoms in the West of the Roman Empire. Amidst these events
Constantine (III) crossed over to Gaul after being newly proclaimed emperor by
.co
the troops of Britannia. He was able to gain control of Gallia and marched south
ate
to Arles but this sparked a conflict with the emperor of the west, Honorius, and
hg
his general Stilicho. The situation had in no way calmed down when in 408 a
as
m
group of the ‘barbarian’ invaders overpowered Constantine’s troops close to the
Pyrenees before they continued on into modern-day Spain. The new general
.co
of the west after Stilicho, Flavius Constantius, finally conquered the usurper
ate
Constantine in Gaul in 411.4

hg
as
Worries about the destruction and political upheavals in the region

m
influenced the thinking of the authors of the period. Many of the texts convey
a sense of the end of times so that the dominating topics are advice about the
.co
preparation for the afterlife and suggestions to evade the world through a life in a
ate
convent or according to an ascetic life style. Additionally the invading or passing

hg
as
groups were largely viewed negatively as barbarians and enemies of Rome. ‘Since
m
the barbarians were mainly heathens or heretical Christians and did not yet
participate in any form of the Roman culture but instead threatened to destroy it
.co
ate
hg
as
Cf. esp. Pierre Courcelle, Histoire littéraire des grandes invasions germaniques
4
m
(2nd edn, Paris, 1964); Guy Halsall, Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376–568
.co
(Cambridge, 2007), pp. 210–14; Peter J. Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire. A New History
ate
of Rome and the Barbarians (Oxford and New York, 2005), ch. 5: The City of God, pp. 228–93
hg
with map 245; Walter Goffart, Barbarian Tides. The Migration Age and the Later Roman
as
Empire (Philadelphia, 2006), pp. 73–118; Michael Kulikowski, ‘Barbarians in Gaul, Usurpers
m
in Britain’, Britannia, 31 (2000): pp. 325–45; Edward James, Europe’s Barbarians AD 200–600
(Harlow, 2009), pp. 50–63; Walter Pohl, Die Völkerwanderung. Eroberung und Integration (2nd
.co
edn, Stuttgart, 2005), pp. 70–75. On Stilicho cf. Ian Hughes, Stilicho. The Vandal Who Saved
ate
Rome (Barnsley, 2010). An overview of the church history of the fifth century is detailed by: Luce
hg
Piétri, ‘Gallien’, in Jean-Marie Mayeur, Charles Piétri, André Vauchez, and Marc Venard (eds), Der
as
lateinische Westen und der byzantinische Osten (431–642), Die Geschichte des Christentums 3
(Freiburg, Basel and Vienna, 1998), pp. 222–63.
Copyright material: You are not permitted to transmit this file in any format or media;
it may not be resold or reused without prior agreement with Ashgate Publishing and
may not be placed on any publicly accessible or commercial servers.
The Homoians in Gaul 273
the Christian inhabitants loathed and hated them’.5 As a result at the beginning
of the fifth century there was a lack of interest in dealing with the gentes.
The immediate adversity is expressed in some of the texts of the period as, for
example, the epic work Commonitorium by Orientus of Auch (Gascogny)
who was bishop in Aquitaine in the first half of the fifth century.6 The book is a
large moral sermon with partially gruesome descriptions of punishments to be
expected in hell. The terrible destruction of his homeland in the years since 407
m
appear to have shocked him tremendously:
.co
ate
This brief life which we now enjoy has nothing long about it, although it is passed
hg
in a long revolution of days. All things, weary, look to the aging end, and already
as
m
the hour of the last day is passing. See how rapidly death has oppressed the whole
world and how many peoples the violence of war has stricken down. Neither the
.co
wild tracts of dense woods nor … avail to frustrate the barbarian hordes. … What
ate
was not conquered by force was conquered by starvation … . Throughout villages
hg
and farms, throughout the countryside and crossroads, and through all districts,
as
m
on all highways leading from this place or that, there was death, sorrow, ruin, fires,
mourning. All Gaul smoked as one funeral pyre.7
.co
ate
He had seen the funerary procession of the foundering world. And the
hg
barbarians were war-mongering hordes devastating large areas of land. Orientus

as
m
of Auch correlates the situation with the approach of the end of the world. In
view of the approaching end of all things he paints an image of the memento
.co
moriendum: Life is ephemeral and only the hope of eternity can help in
ate
overcoming the suffering of the present.

hg
as
m
.co
5
Ilona Opelt, Wolfgang Speyer, ‘Barbar I’, RAC Suppl. 1 (2001): pp. 813–95, at p. 859. It
ate
is even the case that the crisis of the empire by the invasions increased the negative view on the
hg
barbarians. Cf. also the attitude of Ambrosius in Chapter 4 (Uta Heil) in this volume.
as
6
Martin Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV: Gallische Prosopographie 260–527’,

Francia, 10 (1982): pp. 531–718, at pp. 659–60; Michael Roberts, ‘Barbarians in Gaul: The
m
co
Response of the Poets’, in John Drinkwater and Hugh Elton (eds), Fifth Century Gaul: A Crisis
te.
of Identity? (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 97–106. Cf. also Herwig Wolfram, Die Goten. Von den
a
Anfängen bis zur Mitte des sechsten Jahrhunderts, Entwurf einer historischen Ethnographie (5th
hg
as
edn, Munich, 2009), pp. 181–82.

m
7
Orientius, Commonitorium 2.161–184, (ed. Tobin, Patristic Studies 74, pp. 92–95):
Nil habet haec longum, longo licet acta rotatu, quo nunc perfruimur tempore, vita brevis. Lassa
co
senescentem respectant omnia finem et iam postremo volvitur hora die. Respice quam raptim totum
te.
ga
mors presserit orbem, quantos vis belli perculerit populos. Non densi nemoris, celsi non aspera montis, …
h
ludere barbaricas praevaluere manus. … Robore quae non sunt, sunt superata fame. … Per vicos villas,
as
per rura et compita et omnes per pagos, totis inde vel inde viis, mors dolor excidium … incendia luctus:
uno fumavit Gallia tota rogo.

The Gallic aristocrat Eucherius of Lyon – born around 380 – and his family
became part of the ascetic community of Lérins in 410. In addition to a few
exegetical works and the famous report on the martyrs of the Theban legion he
mainly wrote works in praise of asceticism.8 In a protreptic treaty De contemptu
mundi formulated as a letter he petitions a relative to also turn away from the
world: Given the advance of the barbarians and the general moral decline,
salvation can only be found in solitude and asceticism. The end of the world is
m
close; the bounty of the world is destroyed since the world itself is also nearing
.co
its end and the last phase is ebbing away. So the world is only filled with suffering
ate
similar to that of an old person afflicted with sickness and the dying world is
hg
drawing its last breaths – therefore it is even more urgent to take care of heavenly
as
m
matters that lead to salvation since earthly matters will soon decay.
It is not known whether Eucherius changed his views later on. For the
.co
last 15 years of his life – from about 435 up until his death around 450 – he
ate
was bishop of Lyon and witnessed the settling of the Visigoths in Aquitania as
hg
well as the Burgundians in Sapaudia on Lake Geneva. But at the beginning of
as
m
the fifth century the Gallo-Romans were still preoccupied with the hardship of
their period.
.co
ate
hg
as
Visigoths in Gaul (418–507)9

m
After the well-known sack of Rome in 410 Alaric’s Gothic army trekked to
.co
southern Italy. But the crossing to Sicily (the goal was probably North Africa and
ate
its grain bounty) failed and Alaric died. Thus in 411 his brother-in-law Athaulf
hg
as
led the Goths to Gaul, where after a few initial fights and some destruction they
m
settled in the area of Narbonne. In an attempt to indicate his political demands,

he married Galla Placidia, the sister of the emperor Honorius and a hostage of
.co
the Goths since the sack of Rome. But when the heir to the throne (a boy named
ate
hg
as
Cf. John M. Pepino, St. Eucherius of Lyons: Rhetorical Adaptation of Message to Intended
8
m
Audience in Fifth Century Provence (Washington DC, 2009), esp. pp. 100–141; Salvatore
.co
Pricoco (ed.), Eucherio di Lione: Il rifiuto del mondo: De contemptu mundi, Biblioteca patristica 16
ate
(Firenze, 1990); Karl Wotke (ed.), Eucherius von Lyon, Opera omnia, CSEL 31 (Vienna, 1894);
hg
Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 598 (Eucherius 3).

as
9
Cf. on Visigoths in general: Dietrich Claude, Geschichte der Westgoten (Stuttgart, 1970);
m
Peter Heather, The Goths (Oxford, 1996); Ralph W. Mathisen and Hagith Sivan, ‘Forging a
New Identity: The Kingdom of Toulouse and the Frontiers of Visigothic Aquitania’, in Alberto
.co
Ferreiro (ed.), The Visigoths. Studies in Culture and Society, The Medieval Mediterranean 20
ate
(Leiden, 1999), pp. 1–62; Knut Schäferdiek, Die Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen
hg
bis zur Errichtung der westgotischen katholischen Staatskirche (Berlin, 1967); Wolfram, Goten;
as
Manuel Koch, Ethnische Identität im Entstehungsprozess des spanischen Westgotenreiches, RGA

Erg. Bd. 75 (Berlin and Boston, 2012).
Theodosius) died soon after birth and Athaulf fell victim to an inside coup by
the Goths his successor negotiated a peace treaty with the emperor Honorius
in exchange for the widow Galla Placidia. Thus in the years 416–418 the Goths
fought for Rome against the Vandals and Suebi in Spain. They finally received
permission to settle in Aquitania in the valley of the Garonne between Toulouse
and Bordeaux. This initiated a new chapter of Gothic history that later resulted
in the Gothic kingdom of Toulouse.
m
The Visigoths attempted to enlarge their territory multiple times. In addition
.co
to the conquest of Spain, Arles was a preferred target and the Visigoths were
ate
most likely vying for access to the Mediterranean. But Theoderic (418–451)
hg
unsuccessfully besieged Arles in 425 and 430 and Narbonne in 436/437 and
as
m
then had to deal with the Roman counteroffensive and siege of the Visigothic
capital Toulouse in 439. So in 451 he again fought as an ally of Rome against
.co
the Huns in the battle of the Catalaunian Fields. Theoderic II (453–66) tried to
ate
establish the Visigoths as an important power within the Roman Empire through
hg
military campaigns and the participation in the coronation of the Roman
as
m
emperor and thus took control of the area around Narbonne at the beginning
of the 460s. Under Euric (466–84) – who completely eliminated the status of
.co
foederati – a triumphal advance of the Visigoths began, particularly in the 470s.

ate
The Visigoths controlled the west of Gaul from the Atlantic to the estuary of the
hg
Loire – bordered by the Rhône in the east – all the way to Provence. In the north
as
m
was the kingdom of the Franks and in the east the kingdom of the Burgundians.
Theoderic’s successor Alaric II (484–507) stabilised the achievements but had
.co
to confront the expansion of the Franks in the north. The Franks together with
ate
the Burgundians were finally able to defeat the Visigoths in 507 and force them
hg
as
into Spain.
m
Following the accommodation of the Visigoths in Gaul in 418 the attitudes

of the Gallic Romans towards their neighbours varied between concord and
.co
critique just as the Visigothic politics switched between Roman and their
ate
own interests. The Homoian ‘Arianism’ of the Visigoths was only noticed and
hg
as
commented on peripherally; comments on the structure of the church and on

the theological convictions of the Visigoths at this period can only be formulated
m
with caution.
co
te.
Hilary – like Eucherius, a monk in Lérins – was the bishop of Arles

a
from 430 († 449)10 and was primarily interested in reinforcing the supremacy
hg
as
of Arles over the entire Gallic (Catholic) church. While ignoring the new
m
political developments he organised multiple councils (Riez 439, Orange 441,

co
te.
ga
h
as
10
Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 625 (Hilarius 3); Thomas Graumann, ‘Hilarius
von Arles’, RGG, 3 (2000): p. 1732. Cf. also the portrayal of Piétri, ‘Gallien’, pp. 237–49.

Vaison 442, Besançon 44411) but only in Orange in 441 was a single canon
passed that is relevant to our question. This canon explains the procedure for
the admittance of a heretic: If a heretic in mortal danger wishes to become a
Catholic and there is no bishop within reach, then a presbyter is allowed to give
the sacrament of confirmation.12 This ruling expands the existing practice to
include the possibility that in case of emergency a presbyter could confirm the
acceptance.13 But since this ruling only addresses heretics in a very broad sense
m
it is not helpful in understanding the Homoian Visigoths because other heresies
.co
could also be meant. However, a certain anti-Arian tendency is reported in the
ate
vita of Hilary that was written by Honoratus of Marseille (475–96). One remark
hg
is fairly general and notes that Hilary had guided the iron tip of the spiritual
as
m
sword against the ‘poisonous errors of the heretics’.14 A little further on he
explains a bit more clearly that Hilary freed the mother of a certain Heliodorus
.co
from the snares of the Arian heresy and won her over for a spiritual life.15 But
ate
since the purpose of this passage is to demonstrate the spiritual power of Hilary
hg
it does not explain the background of this conversion. The vita ends with the
as
m
appeal of Hilary, shortly before his death, to prepare for future misery and to
uphold the faith in the Trinity in a steadfast manner.16 It is difficult to draw
.co
further conclusions from these scant suggestions, especially since the last remark
ate
was written from the perspective of the author of the vita, Honoratus, who was
hg
as
the bishop of Marseille when the Visigoths controlled the Mediterranean coast.
m
The aforementioned Orientus of Auch appears to no longer have been

averse to Visigothic rule in Gaul a few years after the completion of the
.co
Commonitorium. When Theoderic was besieged in Toulouse by the comes

ate
Litorius, on behalf of the general Aëtius, Orientus transmitted a peace offer

hg
as
to the Roman officer. The hope for peaceful relations might have lessened
m
Orientus’s reservations against the ‘heretical barbarians’ – after all the Visigoths
.co
ate
The synod had been summoned due to a controversial consecration of a bishop; this
11
hg
dispute resulted in a rebuke of Hilary by the pope because of his demands of supremacy over Gaul;
as
Leo I subsequently removed Hilary’s higher rank.

m
12
Concilium Arausiacum a. 441, can. 1, Concilia Galliae (ed. Munier, CCSL 148, p. 78):
.co
Haereticos in mortis discrimine positos, si catholici esse desiderant, si desit episcopus, a presbyteris cum
ate
chrismate et benedictione consignari placuit.

hg
13
Cf. Concilium Arelatense a. 314, can. 9 (8), Concilia Galliae (ed. Munier, CCSL 148,
as
pp. 10–11.)
m
14
Honoratus, Vita S. Hilarii episcopi Arelatensis 14, 5–7 (Cavallin and Jacob (eds), SC 404,
p. 120): ferreum spiritalis gladii acumen in truncandis haereticorum venenatis erroribus exercuerit.
.co
15
Honoratus, Vita S. Hilarii 20, 1–4, (Cavallin and Jacob (eds), SC 404, p. 132): In his
ate
profectibus constitutum subitus ardor accendit, ut Heliodori matrem gaeresis arrianae vinculis
hg
conligatam expeteret, inluminaret, attraheret, et in aeternum oblaturus in praesentia consecraret.

as
16
Honoratus, Vita S. Hilarii 26, 60–61, (Cavallin and Jacob (eds), SC 404, p. 154): Ad
omnia contraria adversaque vos iugiter praeparate: fidem Trinitatis immobiliter retinete … .
were Christians in contrast to the ‘heathen’ Hunnic troopers in Litorius’s army.

In the end Theoderic defeated the comes after having rejected the peace offer
and thus secured his rule over Toulouse.17
Salvian of Marseille († around 480) described the gentes, such as the Visigoths,
not only as acceptable regents but even as God-sent defeaters of the Romans.
He had fled from the Rhine to southern Gaul at the beginning of the century,
later lived as an ascetic monk in Lérins and became Presbyter in Marseille. In
m
his work De gubernatione Dei, written around 450, he compares the degenerate
.co
Christians of the Roman Empire with the morally superior barbarians who were
ate
either heathens or heretics: Duo enim genera in omni gente omnium barbarorum
hg
sunt, id est aut haereticorum aut paganorum).18 His description of the heretic
as
m
barbarians imitates the clichés of the culturally advanced Romans and excuses
their heresies on grounds of their ignorance, since they are not able to read or
.co
write and therefore hold firmly to the wrong beliefs. Erroneously they think of
ate
themselves as orthodox; therefore God is lenient and patient and has temporarily
hg
granted them military success as a divine rod of castigation and divine judgment
as
m
over the Romans. He only briefly describes their teachings: they believe the son
to be inferior to the father and consider the idea of aequalitas as an insult to
.co
the father: Nos eos iniuriam diuinae generationi facere certi sumus quod minorem
ate
patre filium dicant; illi nos iniuriosos patri existimant quia aequales esse credamus.19
hg
This shows that Salvian had the Homoian ‘Arians’ in mind.

as
m
From the relative distance of the south (Marseille and Arles were conquered
by Euric as late as 473) Salvian perceived Arianism as less of a danger
.co
than individuals of a later generation, as for example Perpetuus, bishop of

ate
Tours 458/459–488/489. Tours was conquered by the Visigoths in 465, was

hg
as
lost in 469 and became Visigothic again in the 470s. In this politically insecure
m
period he promoted the reputation of the (Catholic) Saint Martin of Tours. He

dedicated to him a larger, new basilica and wanted to transform Tours into a
.co
supra-regional centre of pilgrimage.20 In addition he commissioned Paulinus

ate
hg
as
17
Vita Orientii 3–4 (AASS Mai I, 63); cf. also Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der

Westgoten und Suewen, p. 10; Wolfram, Goten, pp. 181–82.

m
co
18
Salv. Gub. 4.13.61; cf. Salvian about Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 688; Philippe
te.
Badot and Daniel De Decker, ‘Salvien de Marseille: Note critique’, Augustinianum, 38 (1998):
a
hg
pp. 223–77; David Lambert, ‘The Use of Decay: History in Salvian’s De gubernatione Dei’,
as
Augustinian Studies, 30 (1999): pp. 115–30; Adolf Martin Ritter, ‘Salvian von Marseille’, RGG, 7
m
(2007): p. 811.
19
Salv. Gub. 5.2.9.
co
20
Cf. Sidon. Epist. 4.18 (from 470); Greg. Tur. Hist. 2.14, 10.31.6. Cf. Karl Suso Frank,
te.
ga
‘Martin von Tours und die Anfänge seiner Verehrung’, in Werner Gross and Wolfgang Urban
h
(eds), Martin von Tours. Ein Heiliger Europas (Ostfildern, 1997), pp. 21–61; Dieter von der
as
Nahmer, ‘Martin von Tours’, LMA, 6 (1993): pp. 344–5; Eugen Ewig, ‘Der Martinskult im
Frühmittelalter’, Archiv für mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte, 14 (1962 pp. 11–30), repr. in Eugen

of Perigueux with the revision of the vita of Martin in which he emphasised

his anti-‘Arian’ involvement among other things. This concerns the part of his
life when Martin lived in northern Italy and was driven away by Auxentius of
Milan.21 He then retreated to the island of Gallinaria until he returned to Gaul
with Hilary of Poitiers. Paulinus vividly describes how the flood of the Arian
sect would be broken by the incredible strength of the chest of Martin.22 In the
sixth book about the wonders of Martin at his grave even an anti-Gothic wonder
m
is recounted: when the Visigoths again laid siege to Arles in 459 the general
.co
Aegidius was able to free himself from the Gothic dominance through the help
ate
of Martin and was thus able to break through the siege.23
hg
Although Perpetuus devoted considerable efforts towards strengthening his
as
m
own Catholic, Gallic-Roman tradition with the help of a saint there is very little
evidence to suggest that any missionising attempts to dissuade the Visigoths
.co
from their heresies actually took place.24 This also applies to the Visigoths
ate
themselves: there is absolutely no evidence that might suggest that their rulers or
hg
other prominent personalities had any intention of converting the local Gallic-
as
m
Roman inhabitants to Homoian ‘Arianism’. A religiously uniform kingdom does
.co
ate
Ewig, Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien 2, Beihefte der Francia 3, 2 (Munich, 1979 pp. 371–92).
hg
On Perpetuus and Paulinus cf. Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, pp. 666–68.

as
21
On Auxentius see Chapter 4 (Uta Heil) in this volume.
m
22
Paulinus Petricordiae, De vita Martini 1.238–59 (ed. Petschenig, CSEL 16, 1, pp. 28–9).
The corresponding description by Sulpicius Severus, Vita sancti Martini 6.4–7.1 is somewhat more
.co
demure and not poetic. Paulinus paraphrases Sulpicius Severus’ vita of Martin in books 1–3, the
ate
three dialogues with Martin by Sulpicius in books 4 and 5. Book 6 is a poetic version of the miracle
hg
stories from the grave of Martin in Tours, assembled by Perpetuus himself. Cf. Raymond Van
as
m
Dam, ‘Paulinus of Périgueux and Perpetuus of Tours’, Francia, 14 (1986): pp. 567–73; Meinolf
Vielberg, Der Mönchsbischof von Tours im ‘Martinellus’. Zur Form des spätantiken Dossiers und
.co
seines spätantiken Leitbilds, Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte 79 (Berlin and
ate
New York, 2006), pp. 172–73.

hg
23
Paulinus Petricordiae, De vita Martini 6.111–51 (ed. Petschenig, CSEL 16, 1,
as
pp. 143–44). Cf. the inclusion by Gregory of Tours, Liber I de virtutibus s. Martini, MGH SS
m
rer. Merov. 1, 2, p. 137: Egidius quoque cum obsederetur ab hostibus et, exclusa solatia, turbatus
.co
inpugnaretur, per invocationem beati viri, fugatis hostibus, liberatus est. Idque daemoniacus in medio
ate
basilicae ipsa hora qua gestum fuerat est professus sancti Martini obtentu fuisse concessum.
hg
24
The above mentioned single example in the Vita Hilarii forms an exception. The
as
benefactress Glismoda, named in the inscription as having financially supported the construction
m
of a church in Narbonne does not belong to the fifth but instead to the eighth or ninth century
(Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 618; contra Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der
.co
Westgoten und Suewen, pp. 10–11; Wolfram, Goten, pp. 201–2). Othia, the founder of a
ate
basilica in the vicinity of Narbonne and known by name through an inscription dating to 455
hg
(Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 660) appears not to have been an ‘Arian’ Visigoth, despite
as
his Gothic name, because the coast by Narbonne came under Visigothic control as late as 462
(contra: Mathisen and Sivan, ‘Kingdom of Toulouse’, p. 40).
not appear to have been the aim of their (church) politics. Actual conversions
are not known.25 The only evidence of missionary activity was aimed at other
gentes, in this case at the Suebi in Spain. A short note by Hydatius26 mentions
that in the last year of the rule of Theoderic the Visigoths sent a ‘missionary’
named Aiax, senior Arrianus, to the Suebi (466). The circumstances were likely
a political and religious rapprochement of the Suebi under Rechimund with
the Visigoths in those years that was further supported by marriage politics.
m
Aiax’s effectiveness was considerable – the Suebi are considered ‘Arians’ after
.co
this period – though sadly very little is known about him except for the fact that
ate
he was from Galatia. His title senior may indicate a widely respected position
hg
among the Visigoths.
as
m
During the time of the Visigothic kingdom in Toulouse there is only one
report of a real debate or religious discussion between the Homoian-‘Arian’ and
.co
Catholic parties. An unfortunately short mention in a letter (ep. VII 6,2) by
ate
Sidonius refers to a Goth named Modahari who was active in Provence and had
hg
a public dispute there with Basil of Aix.27 It is only a short laudatory mention
as
m
since Sidonius was happy for Basil that he came out of this dispute as the superior
winner. There is no information about the topics and theses or about Modahari,
.co
who is only referred to as the civem Gothorum by Sidonius Apollinaris. Also the
ate
place and time of this discussion (before 475) can only be surmised.
hg
Disputes are known to have taken place in the 470s between Euric and a few
as
m
bishops. These disputes though do not indicate any intended church politics of
the Visigothic rulers but instead demonstrate the important social position of
.co
the (catholic) bishops in Gaul.28 At the beginning of the 470s Euric crossed the
ate
Rhône in multiple attacks in order to enlarge the Visigothic area to the east and
hg
as
south. Sidonius Apollinaris, who had just become bishop of Clermont, together
m
with his brother-in-law Ecidicius, a military strategist, led a Gallic opposition

against the expansion endeavours of the Visigoths and was therefore exiled for
.co
ate
hg
as
25
Cf. also Mathisen and Sivan, ‘Kingdom of Toulouse’, p 38–39. This topic is of specific

interest to Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen, and he discusses the
m
co
situation of the Catholic Church during the time of the Gallic Visigothic kingdom on pp. 8–67.
te.
26
Hydatius, Chron. 228/232 (ed. Burgess, p. 118): Aiax natione Galata effectus apostata et
a
senior Arrianus inter Suevos regis sui auxilio hostis catholicae fidei et divinae trinitatis emergit. De
hg
as
Gallicana Gothorum habitatione hoc pestiferum inimici hominis virus advectum. Cf. Schäferdiek,
m
Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen, pp. 110–11.

27
Cf. Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 570; Wolfram, Goten, pp. 211–12;
co
Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen, p. 29, no. 83.
te.
ga
28
Cf. Mathisen and Sivan, ‘Kingdom of Toulouse’, p 42: ‘… the Arian Euric was not
h
attacking Catholic orthodoxy per se but the Catholic leadership, and for essentially political
as
rather than religious reasons’. Cf. Wolfram, Goten, pp. 201–6; Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen
der Westgoten und Suewen, pp. 8–67.

about two years after the capture of Clermont.29 In the meantime the emperor
Julius Nepos allowed peace talks to take place with the Visigoths that were mainly
led by respected (catholic) bishops. In return for Auvergne, including Clermont,
Euric would pull out of Provence. Leontius of Arles, Graecus of Marseille, the
aforementioned Basil of Aix, and Faustus of Riez, all from Provence, were
the delegates of a second attempt at mediation. In a dramatic letter to Basil30
Sidonius Apollinaris outlined a very negative image of life under the rule of
m
the Visigoth Euric which would also eradicate the Catholic Church. This letter
.co
likely intended to discourage the delegation from an attempted peace treaty with
ate
Euric and the surrendering of Clermont. An agreement was only reached in 475
hg
after the arrival of another imperial delegate, the respected bishop Ennodius of
as
m
Pavia. The agreement conceded those areas to Euric which he had seized except
for the strip of Provence south of the Durance (this was however taken by Euric
.co
only a year later when Odoacer became the ruler of Italy).
ate
During this expansion phase Euric appears to have tried to lessen the
hg
influence of the Catholic Church within his area of rule by not filling vacant
as
m
bishoprics. Sidonius Apollinaris describes in the abovementioned letter to Basil
that in the meantime multiple bishoprics were vacant (Bordeaux, Périguex,
.co
Rodez, Limoges, Mende, Eauze, Bazas, St. Bertrand-de-Comminges, Auch).31

ate
Persecution or forceful conversion to ‘Arianism’ did not take place and the
hg
as
positions were later filled. At the Catholic synod of Agde in 506, convoked by
m
Alaric II, 34 bishoprics were present, even those that had been vacant in the
meantime (only Ruricius of Limoges excused himself due to illness). Forty-
.co
nine canons were passed that only dealt with disciplinary matters of their
ate
own (catholic) community; no canon addresses the relationship to the ‘Arian’

hg
as
neighbours that could provide information about the situation within the
m
Visigothic church.
After all, a few laws in the Codex Euricianus must be taken into consideration
.co
even if it cannot be exactly determined whether this codification of laws took

ate
place at the time of Euric or Alaric. Along with Knut Schäferdiek it must be
hg
as
assumed that the three laws of the fragmentary codex on church matters ‘must
m
be primarily understood as issued with particular regard to the Arian church’.32

Codex Euricianus 335 states that clerics (clerici, monaci vel sanctimoniales) that
.co
ate
pass away without heirs to the seventh degree or testamentary provision will
hg
entail their entire wealth to the church that they served (totam sibi ecclesia, cui
as
m
29
Cf. Jill Harries, Sidonius Apollinaris and the Fall of Rome (Oxford, 1994); Wolfram,
.co
Goten, pp. 189–92.

ate
30
Sidon. Epist. 7.6, cf. Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen,
hg
pp. 18–31.
as
31
Cf. Mathisen and Sivan, ‘Kingdom of Toulouse’, pp. 41–2; Wolfram, Goten, pp. 203–4.
32
Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen, p. 16.
servierunt, eorum substantiam vindicabit).33 This regulation appears to have been

drawn from the Codex Theodosianus V 3.1. Interestingly the Codex Euricianus
only refers to churches as possible heirs but in contrast to the Codex Theodosianus
does not mention monasteries (bona … sacrosanctae ecclesiae vel monasterio, cui
fuerat destinatus, omnifariam socientur). Possibly this omission was purposely
done: the Homoian-‘Arian’ church apparently had no monasteries. This would
support Schäferdiek’s view that the laws refer to the Visigothic church. If this is
m
the case then we can presume that the Visigoths had a church structure similar to
.co
that of the Catholic Church (with the exception of the monasteries).
ate
Another law (Codex Euricianus 306) deals with the protection of church
hg
property. It is forbidden that clerics pass on their property to descendants. Only
as
m
if these descendants remain in the duty of the church can a heritage be accepted
by them. Furthermore it is specified that a bishop or presbyter (episcopus vel
.co
presbyter) cannot make decisions regarding the asset management on his own
ate
without the consent of the entire clergy (praeter consensu omnium clericorum). A
hg
third relevant law explains the conditions for asylum in churches.34
as
m
In retrospect the expansion of churches can be confirmed from another
perspective. In July 511 the (catholic) bishops from Gaul – now under the
.co
control of the Franks – gathered for a synod in Orléans. Canon 10 of the synodal
ate
acts treats the handling of church buildings of the Homoian-‘Arian’ church of

hg
the Visigoths (de basilicis, quas in peruersitate sua gothi hactenus habuerunt).
as
m
The following can be read there: ‘When former Arian clerics decide to return
to the true church of their own volition and are an integrated personality,
.co
they must receive the ministry for which the bishop deems them worthy and
ate
the dedication through the laying on of hands. Their church buildings are to
hg
as
be consecrated as our own’.35 Since a decision on this matter was needed, there
m
appears to have been a larger number of both clerics and church buildings whose
further disposal needed to be regulated. In view of this the opinion voiced by
.co
Ralph Mathisen is in need of correction: ‘The structure and hierarchy of the

ate
Arian church appear to have been rather different than that of the Catholic: a
hg
as

33
The text of the Codex Euriciani (Legum codicis Euriciani fragmenta): MGH LL
m
co
nat. Germ. 1, § 306, p. 17; § 335, p. 27; Álvaro d’Ors (ed.), Estudios Visigóticos. El codigo de
te.
Eurico, Edición, Palingenesia, Indices, Cuardernos del Instituto Juridico Espanol 12 (Rome and
a
hg
Madrid, 1960), § 306, pp. 31–3, § 335, p. 43.

as
34
To be deduced from Codex Euriciani 9.3.1–4, MGH LL nat. Germ. 1, pp. 379–81;
m
compare d’Ors, El codigo de Eurico, pp. 81–83.

35
Concilium Aurelianense 511, can. 10 (ed. De Clercq, CCSL 148 A, pp. 7, 85–8, 92): De
co
hereticis clericis, qui ad fidem catholicam plena fide ac uoluntate uenerint, uel de basilicis, quas in
te.
ga
peruersitate sua gothi hactenus habuerunt, id censuimus obseruari, ut si clereci fideliter conuertuntur
h
et fidem catholicam integrae confitentur uel ita dignam uitam morum et actuum probitate custodiunt,
as
officium, quo eos episcopus dignos esse censuerit, cum impositae manus benedictione suscipiant; et
ecclesias simili, quo nostrae innouari solent, placuit ordine consecrari.

church, centred on the person of the king, accompanied by some sacerdotes,

but without bishops.36 During the migration of the Visigoths from the eastern
Balkans all the way to Gaul it is possible to refer to a mobile ‘royal chapel’, but
with the settlement and growth in power these conditions would likely have
changed. The specific Homoian-‘Arian’ trait does not consist of a critique of the
structure of offices of the Catholic Church or in the dissolution of the episcopate
but instead in a different understanding of the relationship between the pre-
m
existent Christ and between the Holy Spirit and God, the father.
.co
As we do not know polemics (Streitschriften) from the Visigothic realm it
ate
is difficult to reconstruct the Catholic or Homoian standpoints on theological
hg
differences. One person though deserves closer consideration: Faustus of Riez (†
as
m
around 490),37 one of the aforementioned peace negotiators with Euric in 474.
He was abbot at the monastery of Lérins before he became bishop of Riez
.co
in 460. Faustus was also exiled for a while by Euric as described by his letters
ate
(Epist. 6.2; 9.1; 12.1) but it is not possible to say anything about the reasons for
hg
it, the background or the date of his exile. Faustus’s part in the delegation displays
as
m
an attitude towards accepting Visigothic rule rather than opposing it, as with
Sidonius Apollinaris. As was the case concerning Caesarius of Arles, accusations
.co
of betrayal loomed large due to the proximity of Riez to the area ruled by the
ate
Burgundians. Whether a particular anti-‘Arian’ and therefore anti-Visigothic

hg
as
activity was of importance is speculative. It is also known through Gennadius

m
of Marseille (vir. ill. 86) that Faustus wrote a treatise against the Arians and
Macedonians. This writing did not survive but his other writing, De spiritu
.co
sancto, and another letter (ep. 3) – better referred to as a theological treatise –

ate
are of relevance. The addressee of this letter is not known. Faustus answers three
hg
as
questions that someone posed and which originated from a theological

m
discussion. The answer to the third question regarding the physicality of the soul
caused Claudianus Mamertus to react with his writing De statu animae but since
.co
ate
hg
as
m
.co
Mathisen and Sivan, ‘Kingdom of Toulouse’, p. 39. There is no reason to interpret the few
36
ate
references to clerics in the vicinity of the king (sacerdotes suos, cf. Sidon. Epist. 1.2.4; Ennodius,
hg
Vita Epiphanii 92), in this way. See Chapter 7 (Ralph Mathisen) in this volume.
as
37
On Faustus cf. Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 607 (Faustus 2); Volker H. Drecoll,
m
‘Faustus von Reji’, RGG, 3 (2000): pp. 52–53; Thomas A. Smith, De gratia: Faustus of Riez’s
Treatise on grace and its place in the history of theology, Christianity and Judaism in antiquity 4
.co
(Notre Dame, Ind., 1990); Claudio Micaelli (ed.), Fausto di Riez. Lo Spirito Santo. Introduzione,
ate
traduzione e note, Collana di testi patristici 136 (Rome, 1997). Faustus works: August Engelbrecht
hg
(ed.), Fausti Reiensis praeter Sermones Pseudo-Eusebianos opera, CSEL 21 (Vienna, 1891); most of
as
his letters are trans. by Ralph W. Mathisen (ed.), Ruricius of Limoges and Friends. A Collection of
Letters from Visigothic Gaul, TTH 30 (Liverpool, 1999).
he died in 474, the original letter must have been written some time before the
death of Claudianus.38
In his writing De spiritu sancto Faustus defends the absolute divinity of
the Holy Spirit against various objections. This writing therefore supports the
tendency in later theological discussions regarding the Trinity that the Holy
Spirit played a central role in the dispute. Since the surviving writing begins
without a preface or accompanying letter, the occasion and possible adversary
m
cannot be defined. The recited theses give the writing a dialogue structure and
.co
are attributed to an anonymous ‘you’. Faustus sometimes refers to ‘Macedonian’
ate
or a ‘Macedonius’ with the intention of associating his opponent with the heresy
hg
of the ‘Pneumatomachians’, also referred to as ‘Macedonians’.39 Faustus deals
as
m
with the following objections against the divinity of the Holy Spirit as far as this
can be evaluated from De spiritu sancto (abbreviated as spir. in the following):
.co
ate
• Not only credo et in spiritum sanctum is written in the creed but also
hg
credo in sanctam ecclesiam catholicam. This formulation does not imply
as
m
the divinity of the Holy Spirit since the church would have to be equally
divine (spir. I.2).
.co
• The Holy Spirit does not have any power of creation, but only the Father
ate
(through the son: spir. I.3.6).

hg
• The Holy Spirit is a created being as mentioned in Amos 4:13: ecce ego
as
m
firmans tonitruum et creans spiritum, although superior to all other beings,

creaturam, inquis, dico, sed excellentiorem omnibus creaturis (spir. II.3).
.co
• The passage John 3:5 renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto proves that
ate
the Holy Spirit is created due to the implied equation of water and the
hg
as
Holy Spirit (spir. II.5).

m
• The Holy Spirit is not an independent person because in Scripture one

always reads: ‘Spirit of the Father’, ‘my spirit’ or ‘Spirit of God’ (spir.
.co
I.7; II.4).
ate
• The biblical description of the Holy Spirit as the finger of God

hg
as
(cf. Lk 11:20) expresses his lowliness, ideo minor filio et patre (spir. I.8).

• The various prepositions in Rom. 11:36: quoniam ex ipso et per ipsum et

m
in ipso sunt omnia displays the differences between Father, Son and Holy
co
te.
Spirit (spir. II.4).

a
• If the Holy Spirit is supposed to be viewed as a separate Trinitarian

hg
as
person how would he need to be described; as begotten like the son or

m
as unbegotten like the Father (spir. I.9)? Additionally in the Scripture (1

co
te.
ga
38
In 474 Faustus was also asked for a statement concerning the teaching on grace
h
(Gnadenlehre), cf. Smith, De gratia and Micaelli (ed.), Fausto di Riez. Lo Spirito Santo.
as
39
Faustus, De spiritu sancto 2.4.10–9 (ed. Engelbrecht, CSEL 21, p. 138); Makedonius:
p. 104, 1; p. 105, 16; p. 135, 5; p. 138, 18.

Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1 and Eph. 4:6) only the Father and Son were mentioned
together. Only the Father and the Son should be understood as persons
but not the Holy Spirit: Deinde dualitatem intromittis et dicis spiritum
sanctum propriam non habere personam (spir. II.4).
• A Holy Spirit poured into humans cannot be completely God (spir. II.1).
Many arguments against the divinity of the Holy Spirit are traditional and had
m
already been refuted by earlier theologians in the fourth century (Athanasius of
.co
Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, Ambrosius of Milan) but the discussion about
ate
the formulation in the creed is new and displays a current and continued debate
hg
surrounding the Holy Spirit in Gaul in the fifth century. Faustus appears to be
as
m
reacting to a debate with Homoian-‘Arian’ scholars likely under the influence of
the Visigoths and wanted to provide his Catholic colleagues with an arsenal of
.co
arguments in order to successfully participate in the discussions.
ate
In spir. I.6 Faustus summarises an opposing thesis that is also mentioned
hg
in a similar formulation in the aforementioned letter: sed dicis: si ex illo est,
as
m
iunior illo est.40 It is likely that Faustus here includes the first question directed
at him from the letter because he begins the letter with the words: ‘You ask
.co
me, most reverend of pontiffs, how one should respond to the Arians, who with
ate
a blasphemous tongue attempt to assert: He is unable, one says, to exist unless

hg
as
as a iunior created from the one who was not created’.41 The vocabulary senior/
m
iunior is unusual because other texts dealing with analogous Homoian-‘Arian’

thesis generally use maior/minor or prior/posterior. And both times Faustus
.co
replies to this thesis among others with the comparison that an arm from a body
ate
does not reveal its subordination. In this case Faustus emphasises that the ex in
hg
as
the description of the son as ‘God from God’ / deum ex deo does not indicate
m
any separation, submission or posteriority but instead implies the one divinity
and complete equality (aequalitas) between the Father and the Son.42 The
.co
addressee as well as the circumstances and the occasion for which he wanted
ate
these theological explanations from Faustus are not known. As a result it is only
hg
as
possible to conclude that similar discussions probably took place in Visigothic

m
Gaul in the 470s.

.co
ate
Faustus, De spiritu sancto 1.6.7 (ed. Engelbrecht, CSEL 21, p. 110).

40
hg
Faustus, Epist. 3 (ed. Engelbrecht, CSEL 21, p. 168); tr. Mathisen, Ruricius of Limoges
41
as
and Friends, p. 239: Quaeris a me, reverentissime sacerdotum, quomodo Arrianis respondendum sit,
m
qui blasphemo ore conantur asserere: non potest, inquit, fieri, nisi ut iunior sit genitus ab ingenito.
42
The second question addresses a statement from Faustus himself that he had mentioned
.co
in a letter to Graecus of Marseille (Epist. 7): ‘He feels nothing with the feeling of a sufferer,
ate
but he feels through his connection with a fellowsufferer’. This deals with a question from the
hg
christological dispute that was started by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, and dealt with the
as
relationship between the two natures in Christ, the incarnated. So Epist. 3 was perhaps another
answer to Graecus or can be taken as a hint to broader circulation of the letters to Graecus.
About one hundred years later Gregory of Tours stylised the battle of the
Franks against the Visigoths in 507 as a one-sided religious war of the orthodox
Franks against the heretical Visigothic ‘Arians’ for the protection of the Gallic-
Roman Catholics – although the Franks had led the war in alliance with the
likewise ‘Arian’ Burgundians.43 The depiction by Gregory is quite biased since
already in the preceding year 506 the convocation of the (Catholic) council of
Agde revealed that the Catholic Church had generally accepted the status quo
m
and was beginning to adjust its structures parallel to its new political boundaries.
.co
In the Praefatio of the canones the glorious and pious king is thanked for the
ate
possibility of coming together at the council. The bishops pray for his long life
hg
and God’s support for his empire. The danger of the decline of the Catholic
as
m
Church in Gaul did not exist.
.co
ate
The Burgundians in Gaul
hg
as
m
The 90-year reign of the Burgundians in Gaul along the Rhône began in 443 with
the settling of the remaining groups of the conquered Burgundians from the
.co
Rhine in the Sapaudia west of Lake Geneva as federates of the Roman Empire.44
ate
This small area was militarily important due to the intersection between the
hg
Rhône and Rhine areas as well as the Gallic and Italic regions. It appears likely
as
m
that the Burgundians had to secure the border of the Roman Empire against
the Alamanni. In 451 the Burgundians as well as the Visigoths and the Franks
.co
fought for the general Aëtius against the Huns under the leadership of Attila
ate
who had invaded Gaul in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. This stopped the
hg
as
advances of the Huns into Gaul, and in 456 the Burgundians fought for the
m
emperor Avitus together with the Visigoths against the Suebi in Spain. At this
point the first Burgundian kings are known: Gundowech († around 470) and his
.co
brother Chilperic (I.; † around 480). After a first unsuccessful attempt in 457,
ate
hg
as
43
Greg. Tur. Hist. 2.37.

44
Chronica Gallica a. 452, a. 443, MGH AA 9, p. 660; Richard W. Burgess (ed.), ‘The
m
co
Gallic Chronicle of 452: A New Critical Edition with a Brief Introduction’, in Ralph W. Mathisen
te.
and Danuta Shanzer (eds), Society and Culture in Late Antique Gaul. Revisiting the Sources
a
(Aldershot, 2001), pp. 52–84, at p. 80: Sapaudia Burgundionum reliquiis datur cum indigenis
hg
as
dividenda. ‘The remaining Burgundians receive the Sapaudia and gave to share it with the locals’.
m
For the history of the Burgundian kingdom cf. Hans Hubert Anton, ‘Burgunden II. Historisches’,
RGA, 4 (1981): pp. 235–48; Justin Favrod, Histoire politique du royaume burgonde (443–534)
co
(Lausanne, 1997); Volker Gallé (ed.), Die Burgunder. Ethnogenese und Assimilation eines Volkes,
te.
ga
Schriftenreihe der Nibelungengesellschaft Worms 5 (2nd ed. Worms, 2009); Uta Heil, Avitus von
h
Vienne und die homöische Kirche der Burgunder, Patristische Texte und Studien 66 (Berlin and
as
Boston, 2011), pp. 1–28; Reinhold Kaiser, Die Burgunder, Kohlhammer Urban-Taschenbuch 586
(Stuttgart, 2004).

the Burgundians were able to expand their power west into Lyon and south into
Valence at the beginning of the 460s. A diarchy with seats in Lyon and Geneva
was established. At the same time, however, the Burgundians defined themselves
as part of the Roman Empire: Gundowech was a magister militum per Gallias
and his son Gundobad received this title after the usual career steps in Italy. These
Burgundian royals were closely connected to Ricimer in Italy. The Burgundians
appear to have challenged the expansion efforts of the Visigoths and partially
m
also supported the population in war-torn regions. In the 470s during the decay
.co
of the imperial power structures in Gaul the situation in Gaul changed and the
ate
Burgundians were able to expand their area again under Chilperic I. The Rhône
hg
constituted the western border of the Burgundian area from Avignon to Lyon.
as
m
Further north they most likely controlled the area from Nevers to Langres, and
Lake Neuchâtel to the west and east of the Saône. North of the Durance, the
.co
eastern frontier of the Burgundian territory was marked by Sisteron, Embrun
ate
and Moutiers en Tarentaise in the Alps. Around 480 Gundobad became king
hg
together with his brother Godegisel. They tried to consolidate the kingdom
as
m
through new alliances with the Visigoths, Ostrogoths and Franks accompanied
by appropriate marriages.
.co
Around 500 a war between the brothers Godegisel and Gundobad unsettled
ate
the Burgundian kingdom. Godegisel was not satisfied being only a co-regent
hg
as
under his brother Gundobad and thus allied himself with the Franks. In a battle
m
against the Franks Godegisel switched sides so that Gundobad lost. Gundobad
prevailed in defeating his brother only with Visigothic help. After this event
.co
Gundobad’s son Sigismund became the co-regent beside Gundobad in Geneva

ate
and Gundobad’s niece Chrodechilde was given to the Frankish king Chlodwig
hg
as
as his wife to reinforce the peace with the Franks. In the great battle against
m
the Goths in 507 the Burgundians fought alongside the Franks against the
Visigoths and were able to occupy the small strip south of the Durance to the
.co
Mediterranean Sea for a short time. But an Ostrogothic offensive dislodged them
ate
again from Arles, Marseille, Narbonne and Avignon so that the Durance became
hg
as
the borderline of a southern Gallic prefecture under Italian (Ostrogothic)

m
control. The Burgundians under Sigismund had to accept further territorial

losses: In 522 Sigismund had his son Sigeric, the grandson of Theoderic,
.co
ate
killed due to conspiracy theories. This challenged an offensive from both the
hg
Ostrogoths as well as the Franks and Sigismund was defeated (523). The rest of
as
the kingdom, ruled by Sigismund’s brother Godomar was finally conquered by

m
the Franks in 534.

.co
Compared to the Visigoths the religious situation in fifth- and early sixth-
ate
century Burgundy was more ambiguous. Most probably the Burgundians were
hg
already Christians before they were accepted in the Sapaudia by the imperial
as
authorities45 but the exact differentiation between the Homoian-‘Arian’ and the
Catholic denomination probably was not known to them at this point. Not until
the reign of Gundobad can a clearer religious profile be recognised. This suggests
that the Burgundians consciously chose the Homoian-‘Arian’ denomination
sometime after their settlement in the Sapaudia by contacts with the Homoian-
‘Arian’ Visigoths and Ostrogoths due to political convergence. Uniquely among
the Burgundians both Catholic as well as Homoian-‘Arian’ Christians lived side
m
by side. This can be seen even in the ruling family, namely among the women:
.co
the wife of Chilperic I was Catholic, as was the wife of Gundobad, Caretena,
ate
and Theodelinde, the wife of Godegisel and both daughters of Chilperic
hg
II, Chrodechilde and Crona. Furthermore it is interesting that Sigismund
as
m
switched over to the Catholic faith between 501 and 507 but was nevertheless
able first to become co-regent beside Gundobad and then later the sole ruler.46
.co
In this respect the Homoian-‘Arian’ Christianity only sporadically appears to
ate
have been of political importance and was of less significance to Burgundian
hg
identity than to the Visigoths or Vandals.
as
m
The information about a Burgundian Homoian-‘Arian’ church is sparse.
The most important sources are the writings recorded by Avitus,47 bishop of
.co
Vienne (before 494 to shortly before 519).48 He descended from a Gallo-Roman

ate
hg
as
45
Oros. Hist. 7.32.13; 41.8; Sokr., HE 7.30.
m
46
Cf. Heil, Avitus von Vienne, pp. 48–65; on Sigismund cf. Reinhold Kaiser, ‘Der
Burgunderkönig Sigismund (523/24): erster heiliger König des Mittelalters und erster königlicher
.co
Romfahrer, Bußpilger und Mönch’, in Andreas Meyer, Constanze Rendtel, and Maria Wittmer-
ate
Butsch (eds), Päpste, Pilger und Pönitentiarie, Festschrift für Ludwig Schmugge zum 65. Geburtstag
hg
(Tübingen, 2004), pp. 199–210.

as
On Avitus cf. Max Burckhardt, Die Briefsammlung des Bischofs Avitus von Vienne († 518),
m
47
Abhandlungen zur mittleren und neueren Geschichte 81 (Berlin, 1938), pp. 27–35; Heil, Avitus
.co
von Vienne, pp. 29–45; Martin Heinzelmann, Bischofsherrschaft in Gallien. Zur Kontinuität
ate
römischer Führungsschichten vom 4. bis zum 7. Jahrhundert. Soziale, prosopographische und

hg
bildungsgeschichtliche Aspekte, Beihefte der Francia 5 (Zürich and Munich, 1976), pp. 220–22;
as
Uwe Kühneweg, ‘Alcimus Acdicius Avitus von Vienne, Kirchenpolitiker und Bibeldichter’, in

Peter Gemeinhardt and Uwe Kühneweg (eds), Patristica et Oecumenica, Festschrift für Wolfgang
m
co
A. Bienert zum 65. Geburtstag, Marburger theologische Studien 85 (Marburg, 2004), pp. 124–27;
te.
Danuta Shanzer and Ian N. Wood (eds), Avitus of Vienne. Letters and Selected Prose, TTH 38
a
hg
(Liverpool, 2002), pp. 4–10; PLRE 2 (Avitus 4), p. 195–6; Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’,
as
p. 568. The writings of Avitus are edited by Rudolf Peiper, Alcimi Ecdicii Aviti Viennensis episcopi
m
Opera quae supersunt, MGH AA 6, 2 (Berlin, 1883; repr. Munich, 1985), pp. 1–103 (letters);
pp. 103–57 (Homilia); pp. 200–94 (Poemata). In addition this volume contains pp. 161–4 the
co
faked Collatio (dialogue between Avitus and Gundobad on the trinity), the acts from the synods of
te.
ga
Epao and Lyon pp. 165–77, the Vita Aviti pp. 177–81 and finally various epitaphs on pp. 183–96.
h
48
In 519 Avitus’s successor Julianus signed the resolutions of the synod of Lyon as bishop
as
of Vienne: Acta concilii Lugdunensis (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 175–77 at p. 176, 23). Thus
Avitus died shortly before the synod.

aristocratic family and his father Hesychius/Isicius had already been the bishop
of Vienne. His brother also became a bishop of Valence;49 one of his sisters
became a nun at the age of 10.50 The godfather and spiritual mentor of Avitus was
Mamertus, the predecessor of Hesychius as bishop of Vienne and the brother of
Claudianus Mamertus, whose writing De statu animae was of great importance.51
The pinnacle of his career as bishop was most likely the (Catholic) synod of Epao
in 517 that Avitus – together with Viventiolus of Lyon – summoned shortly
m
after the Catholic Sigismund became sole ruler.52 The towns from where the
.co
bishops travelled reflect the expansion of the Burgundian kingdom at the time.
ate
Similarly to the Visigothic kingdom (synod of Agde in 506) it displays the way
hg
in which the circumstances of the Gallic church at the beginning of the sixth
as
m
century were adapted to the political environment.
In contrast to his earlier Gallic colleagues Avitus displays a certain effort to
.co
missionise the settled ‘heretical barbarians’ and the fairly tolerant conditions
ate
in the kingdom of the Burgundians supported such a theological exchange.
hg
Remarkably the Burgundian king Gundobad even became interested in
as
m
Christian teachings, particularly in knowledge of the bible, and wanted to
discuss this with the well-respected bishop Avitus.
.co
Sometimes Avitus referred to clerics who supported the king Gundobad

ate
among others as theological advisors. In one letter for example, Avitus mentions
hg
as
priests, sacerdotes of Gundobad who had brought forth objections against the
m
divinity of the Holy Spirit.53 Maybe Gundobad relayed this information to him.
Avitus ended the letter with a harsh request to the king: the ruler is strongly
.co
advised to chase away these sacerdotes and to take care that they no longer have
ate
any further influence on him or instruct him, so that his conversion (perfectiam
hg
as
m
.co
ate
PLRE 2 (Apollinaris 5), p. 115; Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, pp. 556–57

49
hg
(Apollinaris 6). Avitus wrote letters to him (Epist. 13; 14; 27; 61; 71; 72; 87; 88), Epist. 13 and 71
as
are letters of Apollinaris to Avitus, and Avitus dedicated his two writings De spiritalis historiae
m
gestis and De consolatoria castitatis laude to him.

.co
50
Avitus wrote the poem De virginitate/De consolatoria castitatis laude (ed. Peiper, MGH
ate
AA 6, 2, pp. 275–94) for her.

hg
51
Claudianus Mamertus, De statu animae, August Engelbrecht (ed.), Claudiani Mamerti
as
opera, CSEL 11 (Vienna, 1885), pp. 18–197; cf. Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 585.
m
52
Avitus, Epist. 90 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, pp. 167–75); Concilium Epaonense a. 517
(ed. De Clercq, CCSL 148 A, pp. 22–37). Forty canones were passed that give direct insight into
.co
the organisational problems of the (Catholic) Church of the time.

ate
53
Avitus, Epist. 1, 16–9 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 13): … potius revolvamus, quod a
hg
sacerdotibus vestris scripsistis obiectum. Igitur discutientibus vobis, utrum spiritus sanctus … creatur
as
an creatura credendus sit. Cf. sacerdotalis auctoritas (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 14, 21); cf. Heil,
Avitus von Vienne, p. 80.
vestram, professio – confessio) is not delayed any further or even prevented.54 In

another letter, addressed to Sigismund, Avitus mentions sacerdotes in the vicinity
of Gundobad with whom he would like to discuss a certain collection of quotes
from the bible.55 And finally, in letter 28, Avitus supports former clerics from
Homoian-‘Arian’ congregations assuming a spiritual position in the Catholic
Church as long as their way of life was not criticised. This supports the idea that
a separate Burgundian church structure existed parallel to the Catholic one: on
m
both sides there are clerics who herd a flock and preside over a congregation.56
.co
The general term ‘cleric’ can be substantiated by a short note from Gregory
ate
of Tours: In connection with a report about Gundobad’s conquest of Vienne
hg
during the war against his brother in 500/501, Gregory mentions the flight of
as
m
Godegisel into the church of the ‘Arians’. In this church however, Godegisel
and the local ‘Arian’ bishop (cum episcopo arriano) were killed. This reference
.co
is interesting because Avitus does not mention an ‘Arian’ bishop in Vienne
ate
although he is the (Catholic) bishop of this city and remained in Vienne during
hg
its siege in 501.57 The ‘Arian’ bishop in question could have entered the city
as
m
with Godegisel but could just as well have been there before. The mention of
ad ecclesiam hereticorum does indeed indicate that a Homoian-‘Arian’ church
.co
existed in Vienne with its own bishop. Godegisel would not have fled into a
ate
recently seized church.

hg
Interestingly there appear to have been regular or annual meetings of the

as
m
Homoian church in Geneva. In a letter to Sigismund Avitus is anxious about

these meetings and the decisions made but the actual circumstances are no
.co
longer certain.58 In any case he is worried about the expansion of the ‘Arian’
ate
heresy and would like to put pressure on Sigismund since he as the Catholic
hg
as
king should prevent this in his seat of residence.

m
.co
54
Avitus, Epist. 1, 38–9 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 14–15): … ne diutius sacerdotes vestri
ate
dicantur, qui sancto spiritui contradicunt: ne deinceps coram vobis putentur docere … .
hg
55
On these letters cf. below p. 289. Avitus, Epist. 23, 34–5 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2,
as
p. 55) polemically plays with the word sacerdotes: Si scriptum misissem, sacerdotibus, immo magis

seductoribus et, ut adhuc verius dicamus, sectatoribus suis se velle proponere.

m
co
56
Concilium Epaonense a. 517 can. 29 (ed. De Clercq, CCSL 148 A, p. 31) deals with the
te.
readmittance of individuals who had drifted into ‘heresy’.

a
hg
57
Greg. Tur. Hist. 2.33; Avitus, Epist. 95 and 96 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, pp. 102–3):
as
Heraclius accuses him of having hidden himself. Avitus accuses Heraclius of having fled. On
m
Heraclius cf. below fn. 65.

58
Avitus, Epist. 31, 9–14 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA, 6, 2, p. 62): Si quidem per annuum
co
te.
quoddam contagium congregatis adversis attento vobis labore curandum est, ne alienae calliditatis
ga
fraude pullulet, quod in dei nomine iam vestra victoria celebrabili virtute succidit, quamlibet Christo
h
propitio praesentibus vobis absistat. Hinc illa sollicitudine priscior constipatio Genavensis, quae in
as
more originis primae virilibus animis virus anguis sibilo feminei sermonis insonuit. Cf. Heil, Avitus
von Vienne, pp. 80–85. Cf. Shanzer and Wood, Avitus, p. 231.

In a letter (Epist. 7) Avitus considers a question asked by Victorius of

Grenoble. He is wondering whether under the rule of the Catholic Sigismund
the Catholic Church should take over or continue using former buildings and
the liturgical paraphernalia of the Homoian-‘Arian’ church:
You asked or actually forced me, most pious brother, to inform you in this letter,
addressed to our Blessedness, whether the chapels and basilicas of the heretics can
m
be admitted into the service of our religion when their founders have joined the
.co
Catholic faith through a correction of their errors’.59
ate
hg
Chapels, or private oratoriae, and small basilicae, or small churches, are
as
m
buildings that were constructed by landowners on their estates. The question
is thus what to do with prayer houses that wealthy Burgundian masters had
.co
constructed and what must be done with them after the landowner switched
ate
confession. In his answer Avitus includes besides oratoriis vel basiliculis privatis
hg
also public churches (de ecclesiis eorum), probably those under the authority of
as
m
the king (fabricas a patre suo [= Gundobad] haereticis institutas). Avitus advises
the addressee to distance himself from this idea and to allow the churches to
.co
collapse. The Catholic Church should avoid potential acts of revenge by the
ate
‘Arians’ since no one can be sure how the political and religious situation will
hg
as
develop. Later at the synod of Epao the assembled bishops came to a slightly
m
different conclusion. According to Canon 33 only the buildings constructed by

‘heretics’ themselves could not be reused but churches that had originally been
.co
built by the Catholic Church could.60 This letter of Avitus is interesting because
ate
he assumes the existence of many private chapels and churches in the possession
hg
as
of wealthy Burgundian ‘heretical’ landowners. Otherwise this question would

m
be irrelevant. If we join these pieces of evidence together it can be concluded

that during the rule of Gundobad a well-structured and organised Homoian-
.co
ate
hg
Avitus, Epist. 7, 7–10 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 35): Petisti, immo potius praecepisti,
59
as
frater piissime, ut datis ad beatitudinem tuam litteris indicarem, utrum haereticorum oratoria sive
m
basilicae ad usus possent nostrae religionis aptari, cum conditores earum ad catholicam se legem erroris
.co
correctione transtulerint. Cf. Heil, Avitus von Vienne, pp. 92–111. Cf. Shanzer and Wood, Avitus,
ate
p. 296.
hg
60
Concilium Epaonense a. 517 can. 33 (ed. De Clercq, CCSL 148 A, p. 33); (ed. Peiper,
as
MGH AA 6, 2, pp. 172, and 18–20): Basilicas haereticorum, quas tanta execratione habemus
m
exosas, ut pollutionem earum purgabilem non putemus, sanctis usibus adplicare despicimus. Sane
quas per violentiam nostris tulerant, possumus revocare. Cf. as well the translation into German:
.co
Josef Limmer, Konzilien und Synoden im spätantiken Gallien von 314 bis 696 nach Christi
ate
Geburt, 1: Chronologische Darstellung, 2: Zusammenschau wichtiger Themenkreise, Wissenschaft

hg
und Religion 10 (2 vols, Frankfurt and Vienna, 2004), vol. 1, p. 181. In general the opinion
as
of Avitus did not prevail as can be seen particularly well in the reused churches of Theoderic
in Ravenna.
‘Arian’ church of the Burgundians had been established along with a clergy,
annual meetings and numerous church buildings.
Many letters of Avitus refer to theological debates that he as well as others
had led with the Burgundians. Of central importance were the discussions
between Avitus and the ruler Gundobad that took place either in letters or in
direct conversation.
Avitus reports to the co-regent Sigismund of an intense but not public
m
theological conversation with Gundobad in the above mentioned letter 23.
.co
Avitus refers to long and difficult negotiations after a temporary break with
ate
the result that Gundobad asked Avitus to send him his exegetical arguments
hg
in written form so that he would be able to discuss them with his ‘Arian’ priest.
as
m
Besides this Avitus mentions a direct inquiry from Gundobad in letter 30:
.co
When the holy bishop Cartenius61 returned from Lyon where he had stayed to
ate
arrange some private affairs after we had already parted ways after the synod, he
hg
reported that you had asked him – or more accurately us – a question. … You
as
m
command that you are shown the reason or more so the authority whereby it
should become clear that the son of God already had substance in the deity before
.co
he took on the nature of the incarnation.62

ate
hg
The biblical evidence for an already explained and discussed thesis was
as
m
pivotal to Gundobad, which might refer to a conversation at the synod in Lyon:

‘You command therefore that we teach with (biblical) authority what we have
.co
already deduced rationally’.63 Complying with this request Avitus offers in his
ate
letter various pieces of biblical evidence for the divinity of the son before the
hg
as
incarnation but also announces a more detailed writing that would include
m
further counter arguments.

In the ninth century Agobard of Lyon cited a passage from a dialogue
.co
between Avitus and Gundobad concerning the correct worship of God. The
ate
introductory sentence reads: … sicut Alcimus Avitus episcopus Viennensis in

hg
as
m
co
te.
61
This Cartenius is otherwise unknown. There is nothing known of the synod in Lyon
a
hg
besides this note.

as
62
Avitus, Epist. 30, 2–4, 9–10 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 60): Rediens ab urbe Lugdunensi
m
sanctus Cartenius episcopus, in qua nobis de concilio discedentibus ad privata quaedam negotia
expedienda resederat, quaestionem sibi, immo magis omnibus nobis proposuisse vos retulit. … Iubetis
co
igitur ostendi vobis rationem vel potius auctoritatem, qua pateat dei filium habuisse in divinitate
te.
ga
substantiam, priusquam sumeret de incarnatione naturam … . Cf. Heil, Avitus von Vienne,
h
pp. 74–75. Cf. Shanzer and Wood, Avitus, p. 204.

as
63
Avitus, Epist. 30, 20–1 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 60): Iubetis ergo, ut haec, quae
ratione colligimus, auctoritate doceamus.

dialogo, ubi cum Gundobado rege loquitur, dicit … .64 In his Liber adversus legem
Gundobadi 13 the same Agobard cites from another dispute between Avitus
and Gundobad: Cum de his inter utrumque sermo esset et beatus Avitus talia
certamina reprehenderet, respondit et Gundobadus … Ad quod beatus Avitus
intulit dicens … . The fragment deals with the connection between fortunes of
war and the judgment of God: Avitus denies that God’s judgment is completely
expressed in the victor. In some cases God also judges without war and often
m
even the right side suffers in war. Thus the aspects that were discussed between
.co
Avitus and Gundobad went beyond the actual theological differences between
ate
the Catholic and the Homoian-‘Arian’ church.65
hg
Further theological fragments from Avitus have survived through the
as
m
Carolingian collection of excerpts compiled by Florus of Lyon. These texts
partially exhibit dialogue elements but cannot be assigned to conversations
.co
preserved in the letters.66
ate
Besides Avitus another man, Heraclius,67 participated in the discussions. He
hg
was a vir illustrissimus, from senatorial nobility and probably also from Vienne.
as
m
Avitus writes to Heraclius when he hears about the latter’s conversation with
.co
ate
hg
Avitus, frg. 2, 8–9 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 2); Agobardus Lugdunensis, Liber
64
as
de imaginibus sanctorum (= De picturis et imaginibus) 9, Lieven van Acker (ed.), Agobardi

m
Lugdunensis opera omnia, CCCM 52 (Turnhout, 1981), pp. 149–81, at p. 159–60. Agobard
was bishop of Lyon during the so-called Carolingian Renaissance and passed away in 840. He is
.co
known particularly for his anti-jewish writings and activities. Cf. Egon Boshof, Erzbischof Agobard
ate
von Lyon. Leben und Werk, Kölner historische Abhandlungen 17 (Cologne, 1967). The fragment of
hg
Avitus deals with a special liturgical expression, a sufficiently controversial topic for such an event.
as
m
See Chapter 4 (Uta Heil) in this volume and below p. 295.

65
Avitus, frg. 3A [Liber adversus legem Gundobadi 13], 30–31, 35 (ed. Peiper, MGH
.co
AA 6, 2, p. 2). In Epist. 1 Avitus on the one hand informs Gundobad about the meaning of the
ate
Hebrew keyword ‘Korban’ (offering) in Mk 7:11–2, before he continues with a discussion on

hg
the Holy Spirit. In epist. 2 and 3 Avitus answers an inquiry from Gundobad about the Eutychian
as
dispute in the east during the time of Anastasius in 511. In Epist. 4 De subitanea paenitentia Avitus
m
writes to Gundobad about repentance, faith and the role of good deeds at the moment of death.
.co
Epist. 5 is a letter of condolence from Avitus to Gundobad after the death of his daughter. In
ate
Epist. 6 Avitus writes about the hundredfold heavenly reward for the sacrifices, the martyrdom,
hg
the conversion and abandonment of the family (Mt 19:27–30). In Epist. 21 Gundobad asks for
as
an exegesis of Mi 4:2–4. Avitus answers in Epist. 22 with an interpretation of Is 2:3–4 and 2

m
Kgs 18:31.
66
Avitus, frg. 14, 23 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 6) refers to a conversation that had already
.co
taken place (ut nuper habita conlocutione tractavimus). Also Avitus, frg. 15, 1 (ed. Peiper, MGH
ate
AA 6, 2, p. 7) alludes to an earlier discussion (quia posueram de evangelio). Cf. and tr. Shanzer and
hg
Wood, Avitus, pp. 163–93; Heil, Avitus von Vienne, pp. 68–72.
as
67
Heraclius: PLRE 2 (Heraclius 5), pp. 542–43; Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’,
p. 623 (Heraclius 5).
Gundobad (habuistis igitur, ut audio, cum rege tractatum).68 In this conversation

Heraclius had defended the ‘Catholic’ cause and receives praise from Avitus
for his rhetorical skills. In his response Heraclius confirms that he had given a
speech before Gundobad and mentions a heretical document that he referred
to (denique incidi chartam, vacuam et chaere oblatrante).69 According to him
the document was not hard to refute since it had numerous but only weak
arguments (quae excogitatis multiplicibus argumentis divinae instructionis non
m
inopem turbare non valuit).70
.co
In the above mentioned letter 28, to Stephanus of Lyon, Avitus answers an
ate
unpreserved letter in which Stephanus informs Avitus about the conversion
hg
of an ‘Arian’ and inquires whether an ‘Arian’ cleric could be accepted into the
as
m
Catholic Church.
The varied confessions and the relatively late adoption of the Homoian-
.co
‘Arian’ Christianity encouraged mutual tolerance71 and enabled an intense
ate
theological exchange. Central to the discussion was still the controversial
hg
understanding of the Holy Spirit. Quite a lot of fragments are preserved in which
as
m
Avitus emphasises the complete equality (aequalitas) of the Holy Spirit to God,
the Father, and his Son and consequently refuses any differentiation, division or
.co
subordination (maior-minor) in the Trinity.72 The specific inquiry of Gundobad

ate
(as in letter 1) has already been pointed out above in which Avitus is supposed to
hg
take a stand whether the Holy Spirit is a creator or created (creator an creatura)
as
m
since Gundobad had discussed precisely this topic with ‘his’ clerics. On the one
hand this is a well-known and a contentious issue that has been debated for a
.co
long time between the Nicene-Catholic and Homoian-‘Arian’ theology, but

ate
on the other hand this topic appears to have been a still agonising issue in the
hg
as
Burgundian kingdom. Thus Avitus cites an argument of the opposition: ‘But

m
if God’s Spirit is not a creation and if the spirit in the human cannot be called
.co
ate
68
Avitus, Epist. 53, 4–5 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 82).
hg
69
Avitus, Epist. 54, 16 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2 , p. 83). Cf. the comment on the corrupted
as
text by Shanzer and Wood, Avitus, p. 319, no. 9.

70
Avitus, Epist. 54, 21–2 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 83). Cf. Heil, Avitus von Vienne,
m
co
pp. 77–78.
te.
71
Cf. also the reference to the freedom of speech Avitus, Epist. 1, 36–9 (ed. Peiper, MGH
a
AA 6, 2, p. 14) allowed by Gundobad and even personally demanded: Sed cum incomparabiliter
hg
as
plura sint, quae sub praesentia gloriae vestrae suggeri queant, illud in fine sermonis, cui non solum
m
tribuitis, sed iniungitis libertatem, deum vosque divina vestraque promissione fretus obsecro, ne diutius
sacerdotes vestri dicantur, qui sancto spiritui contradicunt. ‘Even if incomparably many things exist
co
that could be addressed in presence of your honour, I entreat at the end of my speech, for which
te.
ga
you not only allowed but demanded frank speech, God and yourself, relying on the divine and
h
your promise, that no longer those individuals are called your priests who gainsay the Holy Spirit’.
as
Cf. Shanzer and Wood, Avitus, p. 186.

72
Avitus, frg. 9; Ex sermone de symbolo (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, pp. 5, 122).

a creature who then has God breathed into you?’73 The Homoian-‘Arian’ side
used the passage Wisdom 15:11 ‘God breathed the Spirit into the soul of life’ –
a biblical passage not yet used in the debate – to describe the Spirit as a gift of
God to the Christians that was granted and instilled into them as the time of the
creation. The point of critique thus continued to be the allotment of full divine
powers of creation to the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Homoian ‘Arians’ hinted
at the ‘participation’ of the Holy Spirit in the creation to call into question his
m
divinity: the spirit is breathed in by God; so the spirit is God’s spirit but then
.co
dwells in the humans through God’s breathing. Since the Holy Spirit enters into
ate
the humans, and forms a natural unity with the spirit of the humans he must be a
hg
creature. In this sense the Spirit is a gift to the humans but not a divinity in itself.
as
m
In contrast to this subordination of the Holy Spirit as a creature and gift for
the humans Avitus, similar to Faustus Riez a generation earlier,74 emphasises the
.co
double emergence of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son (filioque): nos
ate
vero spiritum sanctum dicimus a filio et patre procedure.75 Avitus appears to have
hg
discussed the very topic with Gundobad as can be suggested from fragment 14
as
m
(cf. above). In his discussion with Gundobad Avitus underscores the eternal,
everlasting emergence of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son (… sed
.co
praeterito futuroque submoto sub interminabilis aeternitate praesentiae virtutem

ate
processionis ostendit …) so that the Holy Spirit does not emerge after a certain
hg
as
period of time which would make him into a creature that is created and passes
m
away.76 This could be quickly recognised since in the appropriate passage about
the Holy Spirit John 15:26 (‘… who I will send to you’), procedure is used in the
.co
present tense and not in the past tense. Thus for Avitus the eternal emergence of
ate
the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son (a patre filioque procedure) is a basic
hg
as
element of the Catholic teaching that is defined by the Lord himself with his
m
statement in John 15:26 and cannot be given up.77

This teaching about the double emergence of the Holy Spirit out of the Father
.co
and the Son is a Trinitarian model adopted from Augustine (De trinitate). For
ate
Augustine the idea of the community of the Trinitarian persons and the mutual
hg
as
references were essential so that he described the Holy Spirit as a tie holding
m
together the community and as hypostasised love. Since the Father loves the Son
.co
and the Son also loves the Father the Holy Spirit arose from both. Augustine
ate
compares the salvific emergence of the Holy Spirit through the Father and the
hg
Son with the inner-Trinitarian relationship so that the Spirit of the Father is the
as
m
73
Avitus, Epist. 1, 9–10 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 14): Quod si dei spiritus creatura non
est, ac si nec in homine creatura poterat dici spiritus, quem deus insufflasse perhibetur. Cf. Heil, Avitus
.co
von Vienne, pp. 132–80.

ate
74
On Faustus cf. above p. 282; Heil, Avitus von Vienne, pp. 170–76; pp. 187–92.
hg
75
Avitus, frg. 12–3 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 6).
as
76
Avitus, frg. 13 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 6).
77
Cf. Heil, Avitus von Vienne, pp. 180–92.
same as the Spirit of the Son and emerges out of both.78 Since the discussion
about the status of the Holy Spirit was still vivid among the Burgundians
and Visigoths (and Vandals), western theologians such as Faustus and Avitus
adopted the trinitarian theology of Augustine and strengthened the conception
of the double emergence of the Holy Spirit out of the Father and Son. As a
result we also encounter this understanding in the texts of the synod of Toledo
in 589 which document the change of confession of the Visigoth Reccared.79
m
This item of Augustinian theology had far-reaching consequences because the
.co
Latin theology of the West alienated itself from the Greek theology of the East.
ate
The introduction of the filioque in the creed of Constantinople in 381 in the
hg
western tradition played a significant role in the schism between the eastern and
as
m
western church in 1054 and has remained an obstacle in ecumenical dialogue
till this day.80
.co
The texts by Avitus also demonstrate that the discussion about the liturgical
ate
differences in the so-called ‘small Gloria’ which began with the innovation by
hg
Basil of Caesarea in the fourth century, went on.81 While the Homoian-‘Arian’
as
m
side kept the old-fashioned form ‘Glory be to the Father through the Son in the
Holy Ghost’, the Nicene-Catholic side preferred the wording ‘Glory be to the
.co
Father and the Son and/with the Holy Ghost’ in order to avoid any subordination
ate
of the Son and the Holy Spirit under the Father. This small liturgical detail was
hg
the only apparent difference between the Catholics and the Homoians in their
as
m
daily life in church. Avitus argued for example:‘When the angels came down to
earth they proclaimed: ‘Glory to God in the highest’. If the Father and the Son
.co
ate
hg
as
Cf. esp. Bernd Oberdorfer, Filioque. Geschichte und Theologie eines ökumenischen
m
78
Problems, Forschungen zur systematischen und ökumenischen Theologie 96 (Göttingen, 2001),

.co
pp. 107–28; Volker Henning Drecoll, ‘Trinitätslehre’, in Volker Henning Drecoll (ed.), Augustin-
ate
Handbuch (Tübingen, 2007), pp. 447–61.

hg
79
Concilium III Toletanum, Gonzalo Martínez Diez and Felix Rodrigues (eds), La colección
as
canónica hispana, vol. 5: Concilios hispanos: segunda parte, Monumenta Hispaniae Sacra, Serie

Canónica 5 (Madrid, 1992), pp. 55, 71–73; p. 79, 350–52. It was confessed: Spiritus aeque sanctus
m
co
confitendus a nobis et praedicandus est a Patre et Filio procedere et cum Patre et Filio unius esse
te.
substantia. Condemned : quicumque Spiritum sanctum non credet aut non crediderit a Patre et Filio
a
procedere, eum non dixerit coaeternum esse Patri et Filio et quoessentialem. Cf. José Orlandis and
hg
as
Domingo Ramos-Lisson, Die Synoden auf der Iberischen Halbinsel bis zum Einbruch des Islam
m
(711) (Paderborn, 1981), pp. 105–11.

80
On the debate surrounding filioque cf. Oberdorfer, Filioque; Peter Gemeinhardt, Die
co
Filioque-Kontroverse zwischen Ost- und Westkirche im Frühmittelalter (Berlin and New York, 2002);
te.
ga
Michael Böhnke (ed.), Die filioque-Kontroverse. Historische, ökumenische und dogmatische

h
Perspektiven 1200 Jahre nach der Aachener Synode, Quaestiones disputatae 245 (Freiburg, 2011);
as
Anthony Edward Siecienski, The filioque. History of a doctrinal controversy (Oxford, 2010).
81
Cf. this volume p. 108. Avitus, frg. 2; 6; 11; 25 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, pp. 2–10).

and the Holy Spirit are in the highest then we correctly say: “Glory to the Father
and the Son and the Holy Spirit”.’82
According to fragment 2 (cf. above) the question about how much honour to
bring which Trinitarian person and angel-like creature was the topic of a debate
between Avitus and Gundobad.
The remaining texts of Avitus prove the great extent to which Avitus’
arguments follow the ideas of Ambrosius and Augustine. In contrast to the
m
Homoian-‘Arian’ subordination of the Son under the Father he emphasises the
.co
equality of the Trinitarian persons (aequalitas) and their unity of substance
ate
(una substantia in trinitate).83 The biblical statements regarding the lowliness
hg
and subordination of the Son and his obedience towards the Father, according
as
m
to Avitus, must be related to the humanity of Christ. He applies therefore the
hermeneutics frequently criticised by the Homoians. It became clear to what
.co
extent Gundobad asked Avitus for biblical references and that the discussion
ate
of these passages determined the disputes. This conformed to the Homoian
hg
tradition since the insistence on strict biblical language was an important
as
m
element of the Homoian cause right from the beginning.
Once Sigismund switched to the Catholic confession, especially after the
.co
defeat of the Burgundian kingdom through the Franks, the Homoian-‘Arian’

ate
Christianity disappeared from Gaul. Only Gregory of Tours reports a discussion

hg
as
that he had with ‘Arians’ at the end of the sixth century, namely in 580 with
m
an Agila and in 584 with an Oppila;84 both were emissaries of the Visigothic
king Leovigild to the Frankish court of Chilperic I.85 These reports reflect the
.co
religious politics of the Visigoths in the 580s in Spain and belong to the last
ate
phase of the Homoian-‘Arian’ consolidation of the Spanish Visigothic kingdom

hg
as
under Leovigild.
m
.co
82
Avitus, frg. 11 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2 pp. 5–6): Cum apparuissent angeli in terra,
ate
clamaverunt: Gloria in excelsis deo (Lk 2:14). Si pater et filius et spiritus sanctus in excelsis est, bene
hg
dicimus: gloria patri et filio et spiritu sancto. Cf. Heil, Avitus von Vienne, pp. 192–209. Cf. Shanzer
as
and Wood, Avitus, p. 171.

m
83
Avitus, frg. 19 (ed. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2, p. 8).
.co
84
Greg. Tur. Hist. 5.43; 6.40.
ate
85
Cf. Martin Heinzelmann, ‘Heresy in Books I and II of Gregory of Tours’ Historiae’, in
hg
Alexander Callander Murray (ed.), After Rome’s Fall: Narrators and Sources of Early Medieval
as
History. Essays presented to Walter Goffart (Toronto, 1998), pp. 67–82; Edward James, ‘Gregory
m
of Tours and “Arianism”’, in Andrew Cain and Noel Lenski (eds), The Power of Religion in Late
Antiquity (Farnham, 2009), pp. 327–38; Schäferdiek, Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und
.co
Suewen, pp. 186–9; cf. general: Martin Heinzelmann, Gregor von Tours (538–594): Zehn Bücher
ate
Geschichte. Historiographie und Gesellschaftskonzept im 6. Jahrhundert (Darmstadt, 1994);

hg
Kathleen Mitchell and Ian N. Wood (eds), The World of Gregory of Tours, Cultures, Beliefs and
as
Traditions. Medieval and Early Modern Peoples 8 (Leiden, 2002); Ian N. Wood, Gregory of Tours
(Bangor, 1994).

The Homoians in Gaul PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Homoians in Gaul PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

© Copyrighted Material

‘Nicene’. Only because of the settlement of Visigoths and Burgundians in

Gallic provinces was Homoian-‘Arian’ Christianity encountered and dealt with

attention or show enough interest to report on the inner conditions of the

Visigoths or Burgundians. Although some outstanding bishops are known from

Gaul, statements concerning the Visigoths or Burgundians can only be found

own organisational questions or disciplinary issues. One exception is the preserved

writings reveal an intense theological discourse, in particular with the Burgundian

(see third section below on the Burgundians in Gaul).

© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

‘Great Invasion’ – The Rhine Crossing of 406

Constantine in Gaul in 411.4

Worries about the destruction and political upheavals in the region

convent or according to an ascetic life style. Additionally the invading or passing

barbarians were war-mongering hordes devastating large areas of land. Orientus

overcoming the suffering of the present.

edn, Munich, 2009), pp. 181–82.

© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

Visigoths in Gaul (418–507)9

settled in the area of Narbonne. In an attempt to indicate his political demands,

Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, p. 598 (Eucherius 3).

Manuel Koch, Ethnische Identität im Entstehungsprozess des spanischen Westgotenreiches, RGA

foederati – a triumphal advance of the Visigoths began, particularly in the 470s.

Following the accommodation of the Visigoths in Gaul in 418 the attitudes

commented on peripherally; comments on the structure of the church and on

Hilary – like Eucherius, a monk in Lérins – was the bishop of Arles

political developments he organised multiple councils (Riez 439, Orange 441,

© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

The aforementioned Orientus of Auch appears to no longer have been

Commonitorium. When Theoderic was besieged in Toulouse by the comes

Litorius, on behalf of the general Aëtius, Orientus transmitted a peace offer

Leo I subsequently removed Hilary’s higher rank.

chrismate et benedictione consignari placuit.

conligatam expeteret, inluminaret, attraheret, et in aeternum oblaturus in praesentia consecraret.

were Christians in contrast to the ‘heathen’ Hunnic troopers in Litorius’s army.

This shows that Salvian had the Homoian ‘Arians’ in mind.

than individuals of a later generation, as for example Perpetuus, bishop of

Tours 458/459–488/489. Tours was conquered by the Visigoths in 465, was

period he promoted the reputation of the (Catholic) Saint Martin of Tours. He

supra-regional centre of pilgrimage.20 In addition he commissioned Paulinus

Westgoten und Suewen, p. 10; Wolfram, Goten, pp. 181–82.

© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

of Perigueux with the revision of the vita of Martin in which he emphasised

On Perpetuus and Paulinus cf. Heinzelmann, ‘Prosopographica IV’, pp. 666–68.

New York, 2006), pp. 172–73.

with his brother-in-law Ecidicius, a military strategist, led a Gallic opposition

Kirche in den Reichen der Westgoten und Suewen, pp. 110–11.

© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

Rodez, Limoges, Mende, Eauze, Bazas, St. Bertrand-de-Comminges, Auch).31

own (catholic) community; no canon addresses the relationship to the ‘Arian’

even if it cannot be exactly determined whether this codification of laws took

be primarily understood as issued with particular regard to the Arian church’.32

Goten, pp. 189–92.

servierunt, eorum substantiam vindicabit).33 This regulation appears to have been

acts treats the handling of church buildings of the Homoian-‘Arian’ church of

Ralph Mathisen is in need of correction: ‘The structure and hierarchy of the

Madrid, 1960), § 306, pp. 31–3, § 335, p. 43.

compare d’Ors, El codigo de Eurico, pp. 81–83.

© Guido M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher and the contributors (2014)

church, centred on the person of the king, accompanied by some sacerdotes,

Burgundians. Whether a particular anti-‘Arian’ and therefore anti-Visigothic

activity was of importance is speculative. It is also known through Gennadius

sancto, and another letter (ep. 3) – better referred to as a theological treatise –