05-30-2016, 05:38 PM
You have some interesting thoughts.
Odoacer and the Romans were not allied, as Odoacer had been left in Gaul by Attila with his Scirii (whom Gregory mistakes for Saxons) in 451. He was defeated by the Alans in 452, hence Jordanes "second battle of Chalons", but remained a nuisance keeping Roman control of north Gaul at a minimum.
Childeric switched allegiance from Paul to Odoacer because Childeric and Odoacer were already allies, as both had been princes of Attila. Attila invaded Gaul in 451 to place Childeric on the throne of the Franks and vassalize the Rhine, while simultaneously intending to defeat the militarily potent Western Roman Field army. However, the failed siege of Orleans ended his plan, which was further complicated by the disastrous Battle of Chalons. Going off of Hughes' suggestion that Attila had split off a small force to harass Frankish territory and Kim's suggestion that Attila left Odoacer behind to establish dominance in North Gaul, it seems likely that Odoacer had led his Scirii into Frankish territory during that campaign and was unable to meet up with Attila before the Battle of Chalons, trapping him in Gaul.
Aegidius became Magister Militum per Gallias in 457 under Majorian, being elevated from the prior position of Dux Belgicae Secundae that he had been given by Aetius some time in the 440's (possibly 443 when Ricimer came into service under Aetius after the treaty with the Burgundians, it is likely he held the title of Comes Foederatorum). However, upon Majorian's death in 461, Ricimer reinstated Agrippinus as Magister Militum per Gallias (who had replaced Majorian with that title in 452 when Aetius removed Majorian from power). Upon his death in 464, Aegidius did not hold the title of Magister Militum per Gallias, and neither did his successor Paulus. Paulus, based out of Adecavus (Angers), most likely held the titles of Comes Tractus Aremoriciani, and Dux Belgicae Secundae. Paulus served as a regent over Syagrius (like Stilicho over Honorius and Aetius over Valentinian), who was still a child.
Meanwhile, in 457 Childeric had succeeded his brother Merovech as king of the Salian Franks. Aegidius, still somewhat militarily potent with Roman Limitanei forces at his disposal as well as the Alans of Orleans, allied himself with Childeric, who was in turn allied with Odoacer. However, Aegidius was a part of the Roman Empire, even if he wasn't necessarily loyal to Emperors not considered legitimate, like Avitus or Libius Severus who had been appointed by Barbarian Kingdoms (Avitus by the Goths and Libius Severus by Ricimer who was a Burgundian). In Aegidius' eyes, they were not legitimate emperors and so he owed no loyalty to them, unlike Majorian who was a Roman from Egypt and appointed by the Senate, and approved by the Eastern Emperor in Constantinople.
When Aegidius died in 464, the treaties between the Franks, Goths, and Scirii and the Romans would have expired, meaning they had to be rewritten. Exchange of hostages was customary of such treaties with foreign peoples. Having reestablished treaties with Childeric (who Sidonius hints had been defeated by Aegidius in 457 and established a treaty with) and Odoacer, Paulus marched with both of them against the Goths near Aurelianum (Orleans). However, after defeating the Visigoths, the three armies turned on each other, with the Romans defeating Odoacer. Childeric then slew Paul in Angers, and became regent over Syagrius, vassalizing him. Odoacer returned to the Scirii on the Danube and would later ally himself with Childeric when he formed the Kingdom of Italy in 476 (Gregory here has his dates mixed up).
In 481, as you propose, it seems likely Clovis acquired Soissons and the Dux Belgicae Secundae title, which would have held sway over the local Roman population. He then must have gifted it to Ragnachar. In 486 Syagrius drove Ragnachar out of Novidunum in revolt, as Gregory mentions that "Clovis came against him with Ragnachar, his kinsman, because he used to possess the kingdom, and demanded that they make ready a battlefield." Syagrius was defeated and Ragnachar returned to his seat in Novidunum, and Syagrius later captured and executed, which relinquished the rest of his territories to Clovis to do with as he wished.
The passage regarding the Britanni refers to events that take place in 470, not 465. It is unrelated. The Armoricans still nominally considered themselves part of the Roman Empire, even if they operated independently.
As for the potency of the Roman army in the latter half of the 5th century, that's hard to say. Aetius' army suddenly disappeard in 454, and later we find chunks of it under the Comes Dalmatiae Marcellinus (who revolted against Valentinian in 454). It's possible some of it ended up under the control of Aegidius, but unlikely. Aegidius's military forces would have come from the local Limitanei regiments and the Romanized Alans of Sangiban on the Loire, which combined may have numbered around 10,000 men (just a rough guess glancing at the N.D.). He would have been supplemented by the Salian Frankish Foederati of Merovech, until Childeric came to power in 457. At that point Sidonius hints that the Franks and Romans engaged in combat and Aegidius maintained the treaty, but Gregory hints that like Odoacer, the Franks seem to gain the "Socius et Amicus" status of an independent kingdom in 464.
The strength of Syagrius' army could have come from a lot of places: Franks and Armoricans supporting his bid for power, the remnants of the Loire Alans, and the remnants of the Roman Limitanei. Certainly the local Roman aristocracy may have supported him over Clovis, as it would have possibly returned to them some of their farmlands which were being managed by Barbarians under Frankish law (IIRC in Frankish law 2/3rds of the estate of Roman landlord was to be given to a Frank to manage).
Odoacer and the Romans were not allied, as Odoacer had been left in Gaul by Attila with his Scirii (whom Gregory mistakes for Saxons) in 451. He was defeated by the Alans in 452, hence Jordanes "second battle of Chalons", but remained a nuisance keeping Roman control of north Gaul at a minimum.
Childeric switched allegiance from Paul to Odoacer because Childeric and Odoacer were already allies, as both had been princes of Attila. Attila invaded Gaul in 451 to place Childeric on the throne of the Franks and vassalize the Rhine, while simultaneously intending to defeat the militarily potent Western Roman Field army. However, the failed siege of Orleans ended his plan, which was further complicated by the disastrous Battle of Chalons. Going off of Hughes' suggestion that Attila had split off a small force to harass Frankish territory and Kim's suggestion that Attila left Odoacer behind to establish dominance in North Gaul, it seems likely that Odoacer had led his Scirii into Frankish territory during that campaign and was unable to meet up with Attila before the Battle of Chalons, trapping him in Gaul.
Aegidius became Magister Militum per Gallias in 457 under Majorian, being elevated from the prior position of Dux Belgicae Secundae that he had been given by Aetius some time in the 440's (possibly 443 when Ricimer came into service under Aetius after the treaty with the Burgundians, it is likely he held the title of Comes Foederatorum). However, upon Majorian's death in 461, Ricimer reinstated Agrippinus as Magister Militum per Gallias (who had replaced Majorian with that title in 452 when Aetius removed Majorian from power). Upon his death in 464, Aegidius did not hold the title of Magister Militum per Gallias, and neither did his successor Paulus. Paulus, based out of Adecavus (Angers), most likely held the titles of Comes Tractus Aremoriciani, and Dux Belgicae Secundae. Paulus served as a regent over Syagrius (like Stilicho over Honorius and Aetius over Valentinian), who was still a child.
Meanwhile, in 457 Childeric had succeeded his brother Merovech as king of the Salian Franks. Aegidius, still somewhat militarily potent with Roman Limitanei forces at his disposal as well as the Alans of Orleans, allied himself with Childeric, who was in turn allied with Odoacer. However, Aegidius was a part of the Roman Empire, even if he wasn't necessarily loyal to Emperors not considered legitimate, like Avitus or Libius Severus who had been appointed by Barbarian Kingdoms (Avitus by the Goths and Libius Severus by Ricimer who was a Burgundian). In Aegidius' eyes, they were not legitimate emperors and so he owed no loyalty to them, unlike Majorian who was a Roman from Egypt and appointed by the Senate, and approved by the Eastern Emperor in Constantinople.
When Aegidius died in 464, the treaties between the Franks, Goths, and Scirii and the Romans would have expired, meaning they had to be rewritten. Exchange of hostages was customary of such treaties with foreign peoples. Having reestablished treaties with Childeric (who Sidonius hints had been defeated by Aegidius in 457 and established a treaty with) and Odoacer, Paulus marched with both of them against the Goths near Aurelianum (Orleans). However, after defeating the Visigoths, the three armies turned on each other, with the Romans defeating Odoacer. Childeric then slew Paul in Angers, and became regent over Syagrius, vassalizing him. Odoacer returned to the Scirii on the Danube and would later ally himself with Childeric when he formed the Kingdom of Italy in 476 (Gregory here has his dates mixed up).
In 481, as you propose, it seems likely Clovis acquired Soissons and the Dux Belgicae Secundae title, which would have held sway over the local Roman population. He then must have gifted it to Ragnachar. In 486 Syagrius drove Ragnachar out of Novidunum in revolt, as Gregory mentions that "Clovis came against him with Ragnachar, his kinsman, because he used to possess the kingdom, and demanded that they make ready a battlefield." Syagrius was defeated and Ragnachar returned to his seat in Novidunum, and Syagrius later captured and executed, which relinquished the rest of his territories to Clovis to do with as he wished.
The passage regarding the Britanni refers to events that take place in 470, not 465. It is unrelated. The Armoricans still nominally considered themselves part of the Roman Empire, even if they operated independently.
As for the potency of the Roman army in the latter half of the 5th century, that's hard to say. Aetius' army suddenly disappeard in 454, and later we find chunks of it under the Comes Dalmatiae Marcellinus (who revolted against Valentinian in 454). It's possible some of it ended up under the control of Aegidius, but unlikely. Aegidius's military forces would have come from the local Limitanei regiments and the Romanized Alans of Sangiban on the Loire, which combined may have numbered around 10,000 men (just a rough guess glancing at the N.D.). He would have been supplemented by the Salian Frankish Foederati of Merovech, until Childeric came to power in 457. At that point Sidonius hints that the Franks and Romans engaged in combat and Aegidius maintained the treaty, but Gregory hints that like Odoacer, the Franks seem to gain the "Socius et Amicus" status of an independent kingdom in 464.
The strength of Syagrius' army could have come from a lot of places: Franks and Armoricans supporting his bid for power, the remnants of the Loire Alans, and the remnants of the Roman Limitanei. Certainly the local Roman aristocracy may have supported him over Clovis, as it would have possibly returned to them some of their farmlands which were being managed by Barbarians under Frankish law (IIRC in Frankish law 2/3rds of the estate of Roman landlord was to be given to a Frank to manage).
Evan Schultheis | MODERATOR
Rhomaios Living History Society
Support us on Patreon
Rhomaios Living History Society
Support us on Patreon
