Aetius and the Fall of the First Burgundian Kingdom

The Rise of Aetius

After the fall of Stilicho in A.D. 408, the Roman empire had decided to secure military assistance from a non-Germanic source and made a treaty with the Huns, which included the exchange of hostages. One of these was a young Roman named Aetius. By A.D. 425 he had been freed, but his familiarity with the Huns prompted the usurper John (or Joannes), who was in desperate need of military help to ward off an attack at Ravenna, to send Aetius to the Huns with the objective of hiring an army.

Unfortunately for John, Aetius arrived too late to save him, but Aetius was later successful in persuading the Huns to leave Italy in return for booty and hostages. As a result of this remarkable diplomacy, Placidia and Valentinian III forgave him for fighting against them and gave him an imperial title.

In A.D. 432, Aetius lost to his rival Boniface of Africa in a battle fought near Ariminum. Though he returned to his estate, he maintained enough military strength to preclude an open attack from his enemies. However, Boniface’s son-in-law, Sebastian, attempted to have Aetius assassinated. The failed attempt on his life prompted Aetius to leave his estates and he eventually found his way to the Huns, ruled at that time by Rua. Aetius made a treaty with the Huns in which he handed over Pannonia Prima and also sent his own son, Carpilio, as a hostage. With his new Hun allies, Aetius secured his own position in the Empire and faced down Sebastian, becoming a patrician. He turned repeatedly to his Hun allies to assist him in protecting Gallo-Roman interests.

The Destruction of the First Burgundian Kingdom

Aetius often pitted barbarians against each other for the benefit of Rome. This policy was common, as Roman Emperors were reticent to rely on Roman armies because of a fear of civil war. Imperial authorities had long forbidden men of senatorial rank from joining the army and relied upon the populace in the cities to keep the economy moving. As a result, most of the city and country population of the Roman Empire had nothing to do with the military and the best, and only, recruits left were the barbarians.

The Burgundians were one of the first Germanic tribes against whom Aetius marched, with the goal of preventing their further encroachment on Roman soil. Hydatius wrote, “The Burgundians, who had rebelled, were defeated by the Romans under the general Aetius.” According to Prosper of Aquitaine, “Aetius crushed [Gundahar], who was king of the Burgundians and living in Gaul. In response to his entreaty, Aetius gave him peace, which the king did not enjoy for long. For the Huns destroyed him and his people root and branch.” Various other chronicles put the date of these events in the same approximate time frame, and all lay the defeat of the Burgundians at the feet of Aetius and the Huns.

That Aetius and the Huns both attacked the Burgundians has not been disputed. Whether the Huns proceeded with their attack at the bidding of the Roman general, or did so for other reasons, remains unknown. A comparison of the accounts given in the chronicles only adds to the confusion. Hydatius credited Aetius, or forces under his command, for defeating the Burgundians in both A.D. 436 and A.D. 437, while another anonymous chronicler only mentioned that Aetius was responsible defeating the Burgundians in A.D. 436 and made no mention of a second confrontation. Yet, it was the aforementioned account of Prosper of Aquitaine, who lived during the time of the events, which may provide a hint as to what really occurred.

Prosper clearly separated the two attacks upon the Burgundians as well as those responsible. This does not exclude the possibility that the Huns were acting on behalf of Aetius. If true, then it seems likely that Aetius broke his peace with the Burgundians and their spectacular defeat could have resulted from a mistaken belief that they were at peace. In short, they weren’t prepared for war, especially in a weakened state. However, another interpretation of Prosper’s account would indicate that the two separate attacks were committed by different forces and implies differing motivations on the part of each aggressor. Aetius’s motivation was clear. He sought to protect the Gallic aristocracy from Burgundian encroachment. The reasons behind a Hunnic attack are more difficult to determine.

It has been suggested that the Huns may have had their own reasons for attacking the Burgundians. Some contemporary writers wrote that a portion of the Burgundians had not crossed the Rhine with the bulk of their people. Instead, they remained on the eastern shore of the Rhine, in the region between it, the Main, and the Neckar rivers. According to the ecclesiastical historian Socrates, around A.D. 430, these Burgundians were suffering continuous attacks by the Huns, with devastating results.

Apparently, they spurned their traditional, but ineffective, gods and turned to the Christian god for help. According to the story, their prayers were answered when Uptar, the king of this branch of the Huns, exploded, and subsequently died, as a result of a night of overindulgence. (The death of the Arian heretic Arius is another example of this kind of expiration, though Arius could be said to have "shat himself to death", so to speak. Taking Socrates’ examples, it seems prayers were often answered with this sort of explosive result!). Uptar's leaderless tribe of 10,000 was then easily defeated by a force of only 3,000 Burgundians. Finally, because of this stunning victory, the Burgundians became devout Christians.

While this is undoubtedly a conversion story, some details are verified in other sources. Uptar is probably the same person as Octar, the brother of Rua, king of the Huns, who assisted Aetius. Additionally, the relatively small number of warriors engaged in the battle was notable given that the account was written by an ecclesiastical historian, clerics usually given to inflating the size of medieval military forces! Given this, it can be theorized that a group of Huns, led by the brother of Rua, regularly ravaged the Burgundians but were eventually, and unexpectedly, defeated by their one-time victims. As such, the acts later attributed to the Huns, whether singly or at the behest of Aetius, may have been the result of a desire for revenge. However, and perhaps more simply, it could also be a case of a strong Hun army attacking a weak neighbor for booty and treasure. They would not have needed the blessing, or prompting, of Aetius to embark on such a campaign.

Regardless of their motivation, the Huns were effective in reducing the Burgundians “to manageable dimensions, the manner in which this was done becoming a main theme of bardic recitation.” It was such a remarkable event that it was mentioned by several of the extant chroniclers. This “bardic recitation” eventually became known as the Nibelungenlied. As such, the fall of the Burgundians may have inspired legend, but whether the Huns caused their downfall remains a subject for debate. Finally, the encounter with the Huns may have not only inspired an epic tale, but also, shortly after this time (according to some archaeologists), the Burgundians began to emulate the look of their conquerors as they copied Hunnic fashion and even practiced cranial deformation (though that was not a uniquely "Hun" thing to do).


UP NEXT: Germanic Myth and the Burgundians

SOURCES:

E.A. Thompson, A History of Attila and the Huns (London: Oxford University Press, 1948; reprint, Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1975), 65 (page citations are to the reprint edition).
Musset, Germanic Invasions.
Hydatius, in Murray, Merovingian Gaul.
Prosperi Tironis, in Murray, Merovingian Gaul.
Chronicle of 452, in Murray, Merovingian Gaul.
Walter Goffart, “Rome, Constantinople, and the Barbarians,” The American Historical Review 86, no.2 (1981).
H. Baynes, “A Note on Professor Bury’s ‘History of the Later Roman Empire’,” The
Journal of Roman Studies 12 (1922).
Socrates, vii, 30, in Thompson, A History of Attila and the Huns.
Socrates Scholasticus, The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus, in Socrates and Sozomenus: Ecclesiastical Histories, rev. A.C. Zenos, A Select library of Nicene and post-Nicene fathers of the Christian church : Second series, ed. and trans. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, vol. 2, (New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1890).
J.M. Wallace-Hadrill, The Barbarian West, 400-1000 (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1999).

The Christian Conversion of the Burgundians

By A.D. 417, the historian Orosius wrote, the Burgundians, a “strong and destructive nation,” had accepted the Catholic faith and “live kindly, gentle, and harmless lives, not, as it were, with the Gauls as their subjects, but really as their Christian brothers.” Additionally, Orosius wrote that:

The barbarians, detesting their swords, turned to their ploughs and now cherish the Romans as comrades and friends, so that now there may be found among them certain Romans who prefer poverty with freedom among the barbarians than paying tribute with anxiety among the Romans . . . throughout the East and the West the churches of Christ were replete with Huns, Suevi, Vandals, and Burgundians.

Despite Orosius’s contention, it is not known exactly when or how the Burgundians converted to Christianity. In his essay "Christianity and the Northern Barbarians," E.A. Thompson explained that Orosius’ statement that the Burgundians were converted to Catholicism by A.D. 417 "is generally discounted and may be dismissed" and that, no matter how the Germans were converted, the actions of Roman missionaries played only a very small part. Thompson concluded that, although many Catholic bishops worked among the Germans when they entered the Empire as foederati, they were not converted at this time. (NOTE: To clarify, I use the term "Catholic" to explicitly mean Orthodox Christianity or Roman Catholicism, "Arian" to explicitly mean heretical Arian Christianity, and "Christianity" as a more general term).

Barbarian warriors serving in the Roman army may have brought Christianity back to their tribes with them. Additionally, the Christian hostages held by the barbarians were probably the most influential force in their conversion. Paul Lacroix, in Science and Literature in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, explained that by the end of the fourth century, it was common for Christian churches and monasteries to open their doors to the sick. (The first leper houses were usually built near churches). As such, there was an association between Christians and healing, who saw to "[t]he wants both of the body and soul." Thus, Christians were able to leverage their healing expertise (more likely in a passive, rather than an evangelical manner) as a way to expose their pagan neighbors to the faith.

Another way that Christianity entered the barbarian world was through commerce and trade. Missionaries traveled the trade routes where they often persuaded local chieftains, usually with a few gifts, to allow them to preach in the village without repercussions against either themselves or any new barbarian converts. The most successful would secure permission to build a church and thus help to ensure that the barbarians would continue to be exposed to Christianity. Often, these missionaries were supported by not only the Church, but also the emperor who saw political opportunity in religious conversion. Yet, all of these instances were scattered and uncommon. The first serious, or at least well-documented, attempt at proselytizing amongst the Germans did not occur until the middle of the fourth century, when Ulfilas was sent to preach in the Goth lands.

Ulfilas, though descended from a Cappadocian family, had been raised a Goth and sent as a youth to Constantinople as a hostage. In Constantinople he converted to Arian Christianity, was consecrated a bishop at the age of thirty (A.D. 341) and was sent by Eusebius of Nicomedia to proselytize and spread Arian Christianity among the Goths. J.B. Bury held that Ulfilas was sent to preach Arian Christianity to all in the Goth lands. However, an alternative view was put forth by E.A. Thompson, who asserted that Ulfilas was sent to minister only to those Christians already in the Goth lands, such as Roman prisoners or their descendents, and not to convert pagan Goths. As such, Thompson continued:

[T]he Churches of the fourth and fifth centuries delayed for a curiously long time to send bishops to their captive sons and daughters beyond the frontier; and they made little or no organized or planned effort to save the barbarians from the fire everlasting.

Eventually, Ulfilas was forced to leave the Goth lands because of persecution from Goth leaders. However, only some of the Arian Christian Goths followed him to new lands in Moesia, within the borders of the Roman Empire. Other Arian Goths refused to leave and, despite persecution and martyrdom, Arian Christianity gained a foothold among the Goths. Eventually, the other Germanic tribes, including the Burgundians, converted to Arianism.

Ulfilas is best known for both inventing the Gothic alphabet and translating the Bible into Gothic. Equally important was that he was not a Catholic but followed the Arian heresy developed by the bishop Arius of Alexandria in the fourth century. Arians held that neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit were co-equal with God. Additionally, Jesus had been created by God and was not eternal. This was contrary to the Catholic position that Christ was ‘fully God, fully man,’ that He had always existed and always would and that he had assumed human form to instruct and to suffer and die for humanity.

The Roman Emperor Constantine called the First Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 in an attempt to resolve the conflict and Arianism was condemned, though only temporarily. Under the reign of the Arian Emperor Constantius II Arianism became ascendant though his successor, the pagan emperor Julian (the Apostate), encouraged conflict between Catholics and Arians. The ascension of Valens in A.D. 364 returned Arianism to preeminence in the eyes of the empire and it was during his reign that Ulfilas journeyed to the Goth lands and planted the seeds of Arianism.

In A.D. 379, the Catholic Theodosius I assumed the reign of the East and he called the First Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381 at which Arianism was outlawed throughout the Roman Empire. Outside it, however, Arianism had taken hold amongst the Germanic tribes, over whom Rome held no power to dictate religious preferences.

Ammianus gave no hint that the Burgundians had abandoned their pagan religion or priesthood when he wrote his history circa A.D. 395, so it must be assumed that they were still pagan upon entering Gaul in A.D. 406. Despite Orosius’ contention that the Burgundians were Catholic by A.D. 417, it seems improbable that a Catholic missionary would have journeyed through Germany and bypassed other tribes to specifically preach to the Burgundians. Additionally, the Gallic Chronicle implies that all of the major Germanic tribes were Arian by A.D. 451.

Most historians have come to believe that the Burgundians actually converted to Arianism sometime prior to A.D. 436, probably when they were settled as foederati in Germania I. This would justify the story told by the historian Socrates that the eastern Burgundians, those who had stayed on the eastern shore of the Rhine when most of their brethren crossed over into Gaul in A.D. 406, had become Christian around A.D. 430. Although the relationship between the two branches of Burgundians remains unknown, it is probably safe to assume that both groups were converted at about the same time.

The question of who converted the Burgundians remains a mystery lost in the mist of time. Some have theorized that a pocket of Roman Arians along the Rhine converted the Burgundians. Yet, it is more likely that a group of Visigothic missionaries preached to and converted the Burgundians some time after A.D. 418 and the founding of the kingdom of Toulouse. Since any such mission at this time would have had to deal with the Huns, any belief that a large group of Visigothic missionaries went traipsing about the Rhine, surrounded by Huns, is probably an exaggeration. This does not exclude the possibility that a smaller group of Visigothic missionaries could have performed the task.

Most of the conversions were more likely the result of a slow, religious osmosis. By settling in Roman lands, surrounded by Romans, Germans were exposed to Christianity. Nonetheless, a people that linked riches, success and the like to their religion could not help but recognize the benefit of praying to the god of their prosperous neighbors. “The move into a new economic and social world was necessarily followed by a move into a new spiritual world.” Though the Burgundians adopted Arian Christianity, it was still to the Christian God that they prayed and from whom they expected to reap the benefit. James C. Russell showed that, from the beginning, in A.D. 376, when the Goths negotiated with the Arian Christian Emperor of the Eastern Empire Valens to enter imperial lands, religion was used as a political tool. According to Russell, it was a way "in which political leaders vouched for their subjects" and it also showed that Roman culture was associated with Christianity. In other words, one could not be Roman and not be a Christian.

That the majority of the Germanic tribes followed heretical Arianism was probably not an accident. As it had fallen out of favor within the empire, it had increased its influence among the Germanic people outside of the empire. In the case of the Visigoths under Theodosius, the barbarians preferred the decentralized, mostly locally governed Arian Christianity over the organized and centrally governed Catholic faith, which they believed would intrude upon their traditions and tend to weaken their social identity. So, while the barbarians adjusted to, even mimiced, the Roman lifestyle, they did not completely embrace Roman culture. The same attitude has been ascribed to the Burgundians. By adhering to what was regarded as a heretical form of Christianity, the already outnumbered Burgundians only increased their isolation amidst a sea of Gallo-Roman Christians.

Any bonds, be they genealogical or religious, that the Burgundians felt with their Gallo-Roman neighbors were not strong enough to prevent the Gallo-Romans from complaining of Burgundian territorial encroachment. By about A.D. 435, the Burgundians had made many attempts to expand their kingdom by invading the province of Upper Belgica, apparently in the belief that Rome had either weakened or was distracted elsewhere. It was unfortunate for them, at the time, the Roman general in Gaul was Aetius, an extremely capable man.

UP NEXT: Aetius and the Fall of the First Burgundian Kingdom

SOURCES:
Orosius, Seven Books of History.
E.A. Thompson, “Christianity and the Northern Barbarians,” in The Conflict Between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century, ed. Arnaldo Momigliano (London: Oxford University Press, 1963).
Paul Lacroix, Science and Literature in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (New York: Frederick Unger Publishing Co., 1878).
Bury, Invasion of Europe.
C. Warren Hollister, Medieval Europe: A Short History, 8th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998), 19-20.
Roger Collins, Early Medieval Europe, 300-1000, 2d ed. (New York: Palgrave, 1999).
Chronicle of 452.
Otto Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973).
Wolfram, Germanic Peoples.
Musset, Germanic Invasions.
Socrates, 7.30.3, Chronica Minora, ii. 491, in Thompson, “Christianity and the Northern Barbarians.”
James C. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity: A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious Transformation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).
E.A. Thompson, The Visigoths in the Time of Ulfila (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966) in Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity.
Pierre Riche, Education and Culture in the Barbarian West: From the Sixth Through the Eighth Century, trans. John J. Contreni, with a foreword by Richard E. Sullivan (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1976), 218-19, in Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity.
E.A. Thompson, A History of Attila and the Huns (London: Oxford University Press, 1948; reprint, Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1975).

The First Kingdom of the Burgundians

As the empire grew, Rome demanded the provincial landowners pay higher municipal assessments. These landowners passed as much of this burden as they could onto the tenant farmers and slaves on their lands, who, with no other recourse, would sometimes revolt against their landowners. Thus, brigandage (armed rebellion) spread, and the landowners, now often without sufficient workers on their lands, were still required to pay the assessments, regardless of their own ability to collect taxes.

These "brigands" viewed Rome as a greater threat than barbarian incursion and, when faced with the inability of the former to deal adequately with the latter, resorted to raising their own commanders to deal with the problems of rebellion and barbarian raids. When these champions were successful, they would further be raised as emperors, as in the case of Cassius Latinus Postumus and his Gallic Empire from A.D. 259 to A.D. 273.

These events foreshadowed a growing attitude among the provincial Romans. They were more concerned with their immediate welfare than with maintaining a remote ideal of a united Roman empire and, when faced with chaos, turned to whomever could provide immediate relief. Self-interest won out over idealism. In the fifth century this attitude became the norm.

On December 31, 406, Vandals and Alans crossed the Rhine and entered Gaul to raid, pillage and burn. Shortly thereafter, about A.D. 407, the Burgundians filled the vacuum created by the departure of the Vandals and moved down the Main River and ravaged Strassburg, Speier and Worms in the process. They fought and pushed out the Alamanni and occupied new territory on both sides of the Rhine by A.D. 411.

As an aside, Ralph Mathisen--in Roman Aristocrats--has explained that Ausonius, Jerome in A.D. 406, Nazarius in the early fourth century, Sidonius in the fifth century (twice), and Avitus of Vienne in the 6th century all gave approximately the same list of barbarian tribes who they said invaded the empire. These lists indicated no uniquely identifying quality for any of these groups and the frequent mention of the same list seems to indicate that it was a standard litany used to illustrate that there were barbarians invading the empire.

Further, Katherine Fischer Drew is one of many who points to the Greek historian Socrates’ assertion that the Burgundians crossed the Rhine to pursue their primary trade of carpentry and woodworking. This seems a curious passage, though it may have a grain of truth. Perhaps the Burgundians were known for their woodworking talents, though no other evidence to support this can be found in the sources

Traditionally, the Burgundian establishment in this region has been called the Kingdom of Worms, apparently in an attempt to align history with the tales of the Nibelungenlied. In fact, the kingdom was said to be located on the Rhine, downstream of Koblenz, in Roman province of Germania II rather than Germania I. As a result of this historiographical argument, some scholars began referring to it as the Rhenish kingdom of the Burgundians.

During this time, the Roman imperial claimant Constantine III (A.D. 409-411) had entered the Rhone valley. He encountered certain barbarian tribes, often believed to have been Burgundians and Alamanni. At that time, Constantine made some sort of mutually beneficial agreement with these tribes, which they later violated. Further, it seems both groups, the barbarians and Constantine, continued to operate independently of each other in the region, in a sort of acquiescence of feigned ignorance. It seems apparent that if the Burgundians did indeed drive the Alamanni out of territory they occupied, then the two groups may also have had a falling out.

After Constantine III was killed, Jovinus (A.D. 411-412), a Gallo-Roman in northern Gaul, was raised as emperor with the support of the Burgundians. It has also been suggested that Roman officials who had previously supported Constantine III also supported Jovinus. This support of Jovinus for Emperor by the Burgundians was an attempt to strengthen their position within the wider Roman Empire. However, the reign of Jovinus was brief, and the Burgundian’s role as imperial power brokers proved a temporary one. Athaulf and his Visigoths eventually killed Jovinus at the behest of Rome in A.D. 413.

Peter Heather has explained that it was common practice for barbarian groups to attempt to strengthen their position within the Empire by supporting rebellion when the opportunity arose. They respected the strength of Rome too much to strike out on their own, in the open, to set up an independent state by directly usurping land from the Roman Empire. In this, the barbarian tribes and their leaders were just one of the multiple players in Late Antique imperial politics, which included various Roman political and ecclesiastical factions. And, as Ralph Mathisen has noted, however, these factions were just as, if not more, involved in the rise and fall of the various “tyrannical” emperors as were the barbarian groups and their kings.

During this time, the Roman imperial claimant Constantine III (A.D. 409-411) had entered the Rhone valley. He encountered certain barbarian tribes, often believed to have been Burgundians and Alamanni. At that time, Constantine made some sort of mutually beneficial agreement with these tribes, which they later violated. Further, it seems both groups, the barbarians and Constantine, continued to operate independently of each other in the region, in a sort of acquiescence of feigned ignorance.

It seems apparent that if the Burgundians did indeed drive the Alamanni out of territory they occupied, then the two groups may also have had a falling out. After Constantine III was killed, Jovinus (A.D. 411-412), a Gallo-Roman in northern Gaul, was raised as emperor with the support of the Burgundians. It has also been suggested that Roman officials who had previously supported Constantine III also supported Jovinus. This support of Jovinus for Emperor by the Burgundians was an attempt to strengthen their position within the wider Roman Empire. However, the reign of Jovinus was brief, and the Burgundian’s role as imperial power brokers proved a temporary one. Athaulf and his Visigoths eventually killed Jovinus at the behest of Rome in A.D. 413.

After the fall of Jovinus, Prosper of Aquitaine wrote that the Burgundians “acquired part of Gaul near the Rhine.” Prior to their support of Jovinus, Constantine III had confirmed the Burgundians in their possession of the land they had seized along the Rhine. The new emperor, Honorius, accepted them as Federates of the Empire (foederati), probably more out of necessity than desire. As such, in A.D. 413, they were established along the Rhine and pledged to guard the empire against its enemies. This was the first Burgundian kingdom in Gaul, under their king, Gundahar.

UP NEXT: The Conversion of the Burgundians

SOURCES:

Geary, The Myth of Nations.
Mathisen, Roman Aristocrats in Barbarian Gaul.
Prosperi Tironis epitoma chronicon, ed. Th. Mommsen, Chronica Minora I, MGH AA 9 (1892), 385-485. trans. A.C. Murray, in From Roman to Merovingian Gaul: A Reader, ed. and trans. Alexander Callander Murray (Orchard Park, NY: Broadview Press, 2000).
L. Schmidt, Geschichte der Wandalen, 1901 in Bury, Later Roman Empire.
Heather, “The Huns...,” The English Historical Review.
Robert Latouche, “Agriculture in the Early Middle Ages,” in The Barbarian Invasions: Catalyst of a New Order, ed. Katherine Fischer Drew (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970).
Musset, Germanic Invasions.
Orosius, Historiae adv. Paganos, edited by Zangemeister (1889) and E.A. Freeman, Western Europe in the Fifth Century (1904) in Bury, Later Roman Empire.
Chronica Gallica A. CCCCLII, ed. Th. Mommsen, Chronica Minor I, MGH AA 9 (1892), 646-62, trans. by A.C. Murray, in Murray, Merovingian Gaul, 81. (hereafter cited as Chronicle of 452).
Prosperi Tironis, in Murray, Merovingian Gaul.
Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, trans. with an introduction by Lewis Thorpe (London: Penguin Books, 1974).
Mathisen, Roman Aristocrats.
Mathisen, “Proculus, Patroclus, and Pelagianism: The Gallic Church in the Age of the Tyrants,” in Ecclesiastical Factionalism and Religious Controversy in Fifth-Century Gaul, (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University Press, 1989).
The Chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana, ed. and trans. Richard W. Burgess (Oxford, 1993), trans. A.C. Murray, in Murray, Merovingian Gaul.