The Salian Franks

[Nathan Ross]

Unconnected with Aetius, but about Franks, so I thought I'd ask here rather than start a new thread:

Who were the Salian Franks, does anyone know? Most of the other Frankish peoples (Chamavi, Bructeri, etc) seem to have existed previously and turn up in Tacitus and other places, but the Salii not. They were presumably formed from or previously known as some other group or tribe - but what?

Also - who lived in Toxandria before the Salii were first settled there (under Julian, I think)? Is it currently assumed to have been deserted territory? The Cologne-Bavay road was 'fortified' (if we can hold with that idea) a long time beforehand - why, and what was happening to the north of it to require the 'fortification'?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Its believed that the Salii may have been named after a river that went by a similar name at the time. We know there were three groups of Franks: The Neccar Franks (a mix of Francii and Alemanni), the Ripurian Franks (the name Ripurian is unknown as well) and the Salian Franks.

These were the three stable frankish confederations - prior to this in the 300's AD there were frankish confederations that consistently changed hands, size, etc.

Its likely that the Salii were called the Salian franks because they may have stemmed from a specific group of chieftans coming together and forming the confederation.

Prior tot he settlement of Franks in Toxandia in the late 3rd century (same time as the Frisii) the Batavii were settled there I think.

[Nathan Ross]

Its likely that the Salii were called the Salian franks because they may have stemmed from a... confederation.

That's what I was wondering about actually. Such a strong group appearing comparatively suddenly amidst other peoples that had been there for centuries implies either large-scale migration or a confederation of smaller groups. Since the Salii appear closely related to their neighbours the Chamavi, the second explanation seems more likely.

I wondered whether the Salii might actually be the Caninefates, Marsacii, Cugerni and/or various others known to have lived in the area beforehand...

As for Toxandria - not sure about Frankish (or Frisian) settlement in the late 3rd c, officially at least. Ammianus (17.8) mentions that the Salii had 'had the temerity to settle themselves in the past on Roman soil in Toxiandria [sic]' - that's in 358, but it's not clear when 'the past' might have been... Constantius I settled laeti in Gaul/Belgica, but I'm not sure we know where.

Zosimus (Book III) claims that the Salii had been driven south by the Saxons and settled the Batavian island (presumably causing the Batavians to move into Toxandria, as you suggest). This might even imply that the Salii were themselves originally Frisian!

[Flavivs Aetivs]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salian_Franks

May have come from a River called the Sala in ancient times (modern day Ijssel river).

[Flavivs Aetivs]

This is interesting:



One of the listed units are the 'Salii Seniores'



Here one of the units listed are the 'Salii Gallicani'

I wonder if they were recruited from the Salian Franks? Seems likely.

On another note, I have noted a unit called the Britones, one called the Heruli Seniores, and several units of Maurii. I am thinking these barbarian units were recruited (in a Roman organization and as professional soldiers, not as foederati) to supplement losses from the Battle of the River Frigidus.

Furthermore, I have noted large numbers of "Honoriani". These seem to have been units raised under the reign of Honorius (395-423). I think its likely they were raised by Constantius III, to combat in Gaul (where most of them are stationed). the fact that one of these units is named "Honoriani Felices Iuniores" supports my theory of the "Placidi Valentiniani Felices" being named after Valentinian III. I would therefore like to suggest the shields of the Notitia were most likely painted in the 410's, possibly as late as 419 (assuming the Valentinianenses Felices and Valentinianenses Iuniores were part of the Placidi).

However, that would be after military withdrawal from Britain, so it is more likely it was painted under Stilicho in the 400's.

Therefore regarding the Placidi Valentiniani, I think its more likely the two units of the Valentinianenses Iuniores and Valentinianenses Felices were the ones taken to make the Placidi Valentiniani.

Just some thoughts.

[Robert Vermaat]

I thought it better to make a new thread out of this.

Unconnected with Aetius, but about Franks, so I thought I'd ask here rather than start a new thread:
Who were the Salian Franks, does anyone know? Most of the other Frankish peoples (Chamavi, Bructeri, etc) seem to have existed previously and turn up in Tacitus and other places, but the Salii not. They were presumably formed from or previously known as some other group or tribe - but what?
Also - who lived in Toxandria before the Salii were first settled there (under Julian, I think)? Is it currently assumed to have been deserted territory? The Cologne-Bavay road was 'fortified' (if we can hold with that idea) a long time beforehand - why, and what was happening to the north of it to require the 'fortification'?

The Salian Franks were a mixed group, like all of the 'Germanic tribes' which operated on Roman soild in the 5th century. Unlike the ólder' tribes, many of these new groups did not have a fixed structure, no kings, dukes, most likely not even families. Archaeology we see that lots of the warriors of the 'Salians' were individuals who left their homesteads in Drenthe, Overijssel (both NL) and parts of Germany to fight for either the Roman regular army of federate groups already settled in Gaul during the later 4th century. How these latter groups evolved we know very little of, and judging from the earliest Frankish annals they did not know themselves either (we see similar things happen with early Anglo-Saxon history). Most likely it was a warrior culture centered around 'strong men', but without any sucession system inplace.

Returning to the yound men who left their homesteads, they mostly returned there as well, but gradually more and more remain behind in the south. The homesteads themselves gradually move south too (towards the Rhine), until we see that families settle permanently in the south, either across the Rhine, or in Toxandria and other regions in modern Belgium. By then we have arrived in the later 5th century. Only then do we see the first dynastic beginnings of a central royal family that has to wrench powers from a lot of sub-kings, but still without much power until Clovis.

About these earlier groups, they will most probably have settled in areas that were deserted during the troubles of the 3rd century, and which needed cultivation as well as manpower to guard the borders against similar groups. The 'Franks'9as we call them now) always performed this task well. But at the same time, we have lost sight of the tribes as well as the provincials who live there during the 2nd century. We do not know what really happenen to the Batavi for instance, most likely they mix with the newcomers until they are no longer a separate group and become part of the Salian Franks. Same with the Chamavi (although some remain north of the Rhine), the Caninefates, etc.

[Robert Vermaat]

Its believed that the Salii may have been named after a river that went by a similar name at the time. We know there were three groups of Franks: The Neccar Franks (a mix of Francii and Alemanni), the Ripurian Franks (the name Ripurian is unknown as well) and the Salian Franks.
These were the three stable Frankish confederations - prior to this in the 300's AD there were Frankish confederations that consistently changed hands, size, etc.
Its likely that the Salii were called the Salian franks because they may have stemmed from a specific group of chieftans coming together and forming the confederation.
Prior tot he settlement of Franks in Toxandia in the late 3rd century (same time as the Frisii) the Batavii were settled there I think.

The 'Ripuarian Franks' are named after the river Rhine, or the 'river' where they were formed and which they initially defended. The name 'Ripuarii' is actually the name for Limitanei who guard a river frontier.
The Batavi were not settled in Toxandria but in the Betuwe, north of Toxandria. I think the 'moves' of the Franks are not representing a peoples movement but straightforward Roman military planning - they placed a lot of foreign groups in strategic locations throughout the diocese. When we see Merovech in Toxandria this is most likely not reflection Frankish superiority (you still see this in many books and internet pages), but a Roman strategy to create defense in depth. Although some say that Roman authority did not extend further than days' marching from any military force, I think that's underestimating the power of Rome around the mid-5thy century.

If the Franks fought a Roman general this does not need to reflect a foreign invasion either - most battles within Roman territory reflect Roman in0-fighting with support from any group available.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Can't argue with that.

[Robert Vermaat]

Its likely that the Salii were called the Salian franks because they may have stemmed from a... confederation.

That's what I was wondering about actually. Such a strong group appearing comparatively suddenly amidst other peoples that had been there for centuries implies either large-scale migration or a confederation of smaller groups. Since the Salii appear closely related to their neighbours the Chamavi, the second explanation seems more likely.

Chamavi, and a lot of others, but I don’t think we need to look for whole tribes sitting around a large campfire and becoming one large tribe. Archaeology paints us a picture of a myriad of smaller groups and individuals.

I wondered whether the Salii might actually be the Caninefates, Marsacii, Cugerni and/or various others known to have lived in the area beforehand...

Eventually perhaps, although we don’t really know whether or not these provincials actually remained to be mixed, or moved south, or both.

As for Toxandria - not sure about Frankish (or Frisian) settlement in the late 3rd c, officially at least. Ammianus (17.8) mentions that the Salii had 'had the temerity to settle themselves in the past on Roman soil in Toxiandria [sic]' - that's in 358, but it's not clear when 'the past' might have been... Constantius I settled laeti in Gaul/Belgica, but I'm not sure we know where.

Zosimus (Book III) claims that the Salii had been driven south by the Saxons and settled the Batavian island (presumably causing the Batavians to move into Toxandria, as you suggest). This might even imply that the Salii were themselves originally Frisian!

Zosimus is reflecting Roman ideas of tribes moving en bloc, which formed our modern ideas for a long time. But these days, ethnogenesis of Franks, Goths et al is looked upon differently. If an author heard a new name, it’s easy to explain why he thought of a new tribe or a group which suddenly appeared out of nowhere.