¹ The Christian practice of ransoming captives has never been adequately discussed. For a survey of the sources, see Le Blant, E., Inscriptions chrétiennes de la Gaule antérieures au VIII^esiècle (1856–1865) II, no. 543, pp. 284–99Google Scholar.

² For instance, Malnory, A., Saint Césaire, Évêque d'Arles, Bibliothèque de l'école des hautes études 103 (1894, repr. 1978), 96–7Google Scholar; Beck, H. G. J., The Pastoral Care of Souls in South-East France During the Sixth Century (1950), 339–41Google Scholar; and Abel, A.-M., ‘La pauvreté dans la pensée et la pastorale de Saint Césaire d'Arles’, in Études sur l'histoire de la pauvreté (Moyen Age-XVI^esiècle) 1, ed. Mollat, M. (1974), 112Google Scholar.

³ The foundation of all modern work on Caesarius is G. Morin's monumental edition, cited as Morin. Volume 1 contains the sermons of Caesarius ( = CCL 103–4). Volume 11 contains all the other extant writings of Caesarius as well as the Vita.

⁴ For captives seized in war, see Thuc. 6. 62; Diod. Sic. 23. 18; Strabo 7. 7. 3; Amm. Marc. 31.8. 7–8; Greg. Tur., HF 5. 29; Caesarius, Serm. 70. 2. For those seized by brigands or pirates, see Suet., Aug. 32; Sen., Controv. 1. 2; 1. 6; 1. 7; 3. 3; 7. 4; Paus. 5. 21. 11; Augustine, Ep. 10*. 3 (CSEL LXXXVIII, ed. Divjak); Sid. Ap., Ep. 6. 4. 1.

⁵ E. Levy, ‘Captivus Redemptus’, CP 38 (1943), 160–3.

⁶ ibid., 163–71.

⁷ Buckland, W. W., The Roman Law of Slavery (1908), 311–17Google Scholar.

⁸ Cic, Off. 2. 16.

⁹ Hal., Dion., Ant. Rom. 2. 10.2Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Lk. 4: 18–19.

¹¹ Mand. 8. 10.

¹² Cyprian, Ep. 62. 4, CSEL III. 2, ed. G. Hartel. Translations are my own unless otherwise indicated.

¹³ Ep. 62. 1.

¹⁴ Ep. 62. 3.

¹⁵ Off. 2. 15, PL 16. 128–9.

¹⁶ ibid., 2. 15.

¹⁷ ibid., 2. 28.

¹⁸ For examples of conflict over this issue, see Soz., HE 4. 25 and Chrysostom, John, Hom, in Matth. 50/1Google Scholar, 4, PG 58. 508–9.

¹⁹ Off. 2. 28.

²⁰ Pomerius, Julianus, de vita contemplativa 1. 25Google Scholar, PL 59. 440; Vita Ambrosii 38, PL 14. 43; Vita Honorati 20, in Cavallin, S., Vitae Sanctorum Honorati et Hilarii Episcoporum Arelatensium, Skrifter utgivna av vetenskaps–societeten i Lund 40 (1952), 64Google Scholar; Vita Paulini 6, PL 53. 862–3; Avitus of Vienne, Ep. 35 in MGH (AA) VI. 2, ed. R. Peiper, 65; and Vitas Sanctorum Patrum Emeretensium 4. 10. 2, The Catholic University of America, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Language and Literature 19, ed. J. N. Garvin, 187 (Fidelis of Mérida).

For inscriptions see Le Blant, op. cit. (n. 1), nos. 405 (Domninus of Vienne) and 425 (Namatius of Vienne), and Egli, E., ‘Die christlichen Inschriften der Schweiz vom 4. – 9. Jahrhundert’, Mitteilungen der Antiquarischen Gesellschaft in Zürich 24 (1895)Google Scholar, no. 37 (Valentinianus of Chur).

Finally, see Ven. Fort., Carm. 4. 8. 23–4 (Cronopius of Périgueux), Carm. 5. 6 (Syagrius of Autun), and Carm. 9. 9. 19–20 (Sidonius of Mayence).

²¹ Gelasius, Ep. 10, PL 59. 57; Gregory the Great, Ep. 7. 13; 7. 35, CCL 140. Council of Orleans (511), can. 5 in Concilia Galliae, ed. C. de Clercq, CCL 148A, 6; Council of Mâcon (585), can. 5, ibid., 241.

²² Ep. ad Coroticum 14 in Hanson, R. P. C. (ed.), Confession et Lettre à Coroticus, SC 249 (1978), 144–6Google Scholar. These viri sancti may have been monks or bishops. Cf. ibid., 146, n. 1.

²³ Vita Augustini 24, PL 32. 54.

²⁴ Vita Hilarii 11 in S. Cavallin, op. cit. (n. 20), 90–1.

²⁵ Victor Vit. 1. 8. 25, CSEL VII, 12.

²⁶ Vita Caesarii 1. 32.

²⁷ Greg. Tur., HF 7. 24.

²⁸ CJ 1. 2. 21 (529); Justinian, Nov. 65 (538); Nov. 120. 10 (544). Council of Clichy (626–7), can. 25, CCL 148A, 296.

²⁹ Duchesne, L., Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution, 2nd Eng. ed., trans. McClure, M. L. (1904), 199, 208Google Scholar.

³⁰ For example, Leo the Great, Serm. 10. 2, PL 54. 164; Laurentius of Milan, Hom. 2, PL 66. 108; and Valerianus of Cimiez, Hom. 7. 5, PL 52. 715.

³¹ Instances of redemption by wealthy individuals can be found in Le Blant, op. cit. (n. 1), no. 543; Ven. Fort., Carm. 4. 27. 15; Sid. Ap., Ep. 4. 11. 4; Greg. Tur., Glor. Mar. 105, MGH (SRM) 1, 560–1.

³² Ep 10*. 7.

³³ Ep. 10*. 3. There is some disagreement about this point. See M. C. Lepelley, ‘La crise de l'Afrique romaine au début du V^esiècle, d'après les lettres nouvellement découvertes de Saint Augustin’, CRAI, juillet-octobre 1981, 459, and H. Chadwick, 'New Letters of St. Augustine’, JThS, N.s. 34 (1983), 433.

³⁴ Ep. 10*. 8.

³⁵ Chadwick, H., ‘The Role of the Christian Bishop in Ancient Society’, Center for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture, Colloquy 35 (Berkeley, Calif., Feb. 25, 1979), 5Google Scholar.

³⁶ Texts of the Vita Caesarii are available in Morin 11, 293–349, and in MGH (SRM) III, ed. B. Krusch, 433–501. For the date of the Vita, see Arnold, C. F., Caesarius von Arelate und die gallische Kirche seiner Zeit (1894), 497–8Google Scholar.

³⁷ Even Krusch, whom Morin once called ‘ce terrible critique’, accepted the authenticity of the Vita, describing it as a ‘pretiosissimum monumentum historicum’, MGH (SRM) III, 433. Cf. also Arnold, op. cit., 496–8 and Malnory, op. cit. (n. 2), i–iv.

³⁸ Duchesne 1, 278.

³⁹ ibid., 315.

⁴⁰ Viventius appears to have been the only bishop present at this council whose see is not identified in the subscriptions; he may not have had one at the time, CCL 148A, 143.

⁴¹ Epistolae Arelatenses 28 in MGH (Ep.) III, ed. W. Gundlach, 41.

⁴² Journey to Italy: for the authors' familiarity with the court of Theodoric, see their account of Caesarius' encounter with Helpidius, infra, p. 196; the substance of the meeting with Pope Symmachus is corroborated by Epist. Arel. 28. Cf. also Ennodius, Ep. 9. 33, MGH (AA) VII, ed. F. Vogel, 321.

Bishops: Silvester of Chalon (Vita 1. 4; Greg. Tur., Glor. Conf. 84, MGH (SRM) 1, 802; Cone. Epaonense (517), CCL 148A, 35; Cone. Lugdunense (518–23), CCL 148A, 41): Aeonius of Arles (Vita 1. 10; Epist. Arel. 22, 23, 24).

Aristocrats: Firminus (Vita 1. 8; PLRE 11, 471); Liberius (Vita 2. 10; PLRE II, 677–81); and Parthenius (Vita 1. 49; PLRE 11, 833–4).

⁴³ Cavallin, S., Literarhistorische und textkritische Studien zur Vita S. Caesarii Arelatensis (1934), 20–7Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ Rousselle, A., ‘From Sanctuary to Miracle-Worker: Healing in Fourth-Century Gaul’, tr. Forster, E. in Religion, Ritual, and the Sacred, ed. Forster, R. and Ranum, O. (1982), 110–17Google Scholar; Stancliffe, C. E., St. Martin and his Hagiographer (1983), 249–56Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Luco: Vita 2. 18; Cataroscensis ecclesia: Vita 2. 20; Citaristana parrochia: Vita 2. 21; Succentriones: Vita 2. 22

⁴⁶ A notable case is the treatment of Jews in the Vita. For a brief, but incisive discussion, see Lévi, I., ‘Saint Césaire and les Juifs d'Arles’, Revue des études juives 30 (1895), 295–8Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ For the dating of these events see Delage, M.-J. (ed.), Césaire d'Arles. Sermons au Peuple I, SC 175 (1970. 37–43Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Supra, n. 42.

⁴⁹ He was twice arrested by the Visigoths (Vita 1. 21–4; 29–31) and once by the Ostrogoths (Vita 1. 36).

⁵⁰ See, for example, the accusations of Licinianus, a notarius, in Vita 1. 21.

⁵¹ Wallace-Hadrill, J. M., The Frankish Church (1983), 97–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵² Chron. Min. II, MGH (AA) XI, ed. Th. Mommsen, 223. Greg. Tur., HF 2. 37.

⁵³ Jordanes, Get. 58, MGH (AA) v. 1, ed. Th. Mommsen, 135.

⁵⁴ The fifth-century Statuta Ecclesiae Antiqua (can. 50, CCL 148, ed. C. Munier, 174) had required a bishop to obtain the consent of his clergy before disposing of church property. The clergy of Arles, in the belief that they were defending an ancient privilege, may have been protesting against not only Caesarius' alienation of church property, but also his failure to obtain their permission to do so.

⁵⁵ Canon 7, CCL 148, 195.

⁵⁶ Schmeck, H., ‘Infidelis. Ein Beitrag zur Wortgeschichte’, Vigiliae Christianae 5 (1951), 138–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁷ Bardy, G., ‘L'attitude politique de saint Césaire d'Arles’, Revue d'histoire de l'église de France 33 (1947), 249CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁸ For an argument in favour of a conversion in the year 508, see Oppenheimer, F., ‘Place and Date of Clovis' Baptism’, in his Frankish Themes and Problems 1952), 19–63Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ The ownership of Christian slaves by Jewish masters was severely restricted or prohibited precisely because conversion to Judaism was feared. See the series of laws dating between 335 and 423 in CTh 16. 9. 1–5. See also Sirm. 6 (425); and the Frankish councils of Orléans III (538), can. 14; Orléans IV (541), can. 30; and Mâcon (581–3), can. 16 and 17, in CCL 148A. On the Talmudic requirement that Jews try to convert their slaves, see Kahn, Z.L'esclavage selon la Bible et le Talmud (1867), 138–48Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ cf. also Rom. 6: 22, in which servi Dei refers to the entire local Christian community and, similarly, I Pt. 2: 16.

⁶¹ Morin 11, 134. Cf. also Acts 16: 17, where servi Dei refers to Paul and his companions and Rom. 1:1, where servus Christi refers to Paul.

⁶² Caesarius specifically mentions captives as recipients of Christian charity in Serm. 30. 4, 6; 35. 4; 39. 1; and 146. 2. It is likely that one or more of these was delivered while he was trying to raise money for the ransom of captives in Arles.

⁶³ Soc, HE 7. 21, PG 67. 781–4.

⁶⁴ I take ‘adiectis in eo solidis trecentis’ (Vita 1. 37) to refer to 300 solidi in addition to the value of the silver dish, which, at 5 solidi to the pound, would also have been worth about 300 solidi. For this rate of exchange, see CTh 13. 2. 1 (397) (= CJ 10. 78. 1); for a rate of 4 solidi to the pound, see CTh 8. 4. 27 (422). The rate would, of course, have fluctuated. See Jones, A. H. M., The Later Roman Empire, 284–602 (1964) 1, 439–40Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Translation adapted from Hillgarth, J. N., The Conversion of Western Europe, 350–750 (1969)Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ A precedent for this action can be observed in the negotiations of Bishop Epiphanius a generation earlier. In an exact reversal of Caesarius' mission, he was sent by Theodoric to Gundobad to obtain the redemption of over 6,000 Ostrogothic subjects held by the Burgundians in their territory. Furnished with funds from Theodoric, a lay woman named Syagria, and Avitus of Vienne, Epiphanius not only obtained redemption for the captives, but provided them with financial assistance as well, Ennodius, Vita Epiphanii 171–81, MGH (AA) VII, 106.

⁶⁷ Rouche, M., L'Aquitaine des Wisigoths aux Arabes, 418–781 (1979), 49–50Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Malnory, op. cit. (n. 2), 97.

⁶⁹ For a summary of Caesarius' general attitude to the feeding and clothing of the poor, see A.-M. Abel, op. cit. (n. 2), III–21. See also Vita 1. 44; 2. 23–4.

⁷⁰ Daly, W. M., ‘Caesarius of Arles, A Precursor of Medieval Christendom’, Traditio 26 (1970), 20 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷¹ Grenier, A., Manuel d'archéologie gallo-romaine 1Google Scholar (= Déchelette, J., Manuel d'archéologie préhistorique celtique et gallo-romaine v) (1931), 289–95Google Scholar.

⁷² For the Notitia Galliarum, see Mommsen, Th. (ed.), Chron. Min. 1Google Scholar, MGH (AA) IX, 552–612. For a recent discussion, see Harries, J., ‘Church and State in the Notitia Galliarum’, JRS 68 (1978), 26–43Google Scholar.

⁷³ Griffe 11, 138–46.

⁷⁴ For an early date (c. 395), see Palanque, J.-R., ‘La date du transfert de la Préfecture des Gaules de Trèves à Arles’, Revue des études anciennes 36 (1934), 359–65Google Scholar, and ‘Du nouveau sur la date de transfert de la Préfecture des Gaules de Trèves à Arles’, Provence historique 23 (1973)Google Scholar, fasc. 93–4, 29–38. For a late date (c. 407), see Chastagnol, A., ‘Le repli sur Arles des services administratifs gaulois en l'an 407 de notre ère’, Revue historique 249 (1973), 23–40Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Chastagnol, , ‘Le repli sur Arles’, 32Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ Dates range from 398 (Duchesne, L., ‘Le Concile de Turin’, Revue historique 87 (1905), 278–302Google Scholar and Palanque, J.-R., ‘Les dissensions des églises des Gaules à la fin du IV^esiècle et la date du concile de Turin’, Revue d'histoire de l'église de France 21 (1935), 481–501Google Scholar) to 417 (Babut, E.-Ch., Le Concile de Turin (1904), 7 ffGoogle Scholar. and Chastagnol, A., ‘Le repli sur Arles’, 36–40Google Scholar).

⁷⁷ Concilia Galliae, CCL 148, pp. 55–6.

⁷⁸ The most notorious of these bishops was Hilarius of Arles. For an account of his activities and the restrictions placed on him by Pope Leo I, see Griffe 11, 200–12; Langgärtner, 61–79; Mathisen, R. W., Phoenix 33 (1979), 160–9Google Scholar; and Heinzelmann, M., Bischofsherrschaft in Gallien, Beihefte der Francia 5 (1976), 78–84Google Scholar.

⁷⁹ Epist. Arel. 12, op. cit. (n. 41), 17–20.

⁸⁰ Epist. Arel. 13, ibid., 21. There is some disagreement on this point. See Griffe II, 165, and Duchesne 1, 124.

⁸¹ Griffe II, 163–8.

⁸² Epist. Arel. 25, op. cit. (n. 41), 35–6.

⁸³ ibid., 36.

⁸⁴ Cassiod., Var. 8. 10. 8 in MGH (AA) XII, ed. T. Mommsen, 241. Cf. also A. Malnory, op. cit. (n. 2), 129–32, and Longnon, A., Géographie de la Gaule au VI^esiècle (1878), 60–2Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Concilia Galliae, CCL 148A, 35–7.

⁸⁶ Arnold, op. cit. (n. 36), 261.

⁸⁷ Socrates, HE 7. 25, PG 67. 793–8. The distribution of grain across provincial boundaries by Patiens of Lyon in 471 may have had a similar intent, Sid. Ap., Ep. 6. 12. 5–8.

⁸⁸ Duchesne 1, 300.

⁸⁹ e.g., the parishes of Ceyreste and Saint-Jean-de-Garguier, on the border between Arles and Marseille, which Patroclus of Marseille attempted to transfer to his own diocese in the early fifth century, Epist. Arel. I, op. cit. (n. 41), 6.

⁹⁰ Langgärtner discusses the papal interest in stable boundArles, 135–6.

⁹¹ Isidore, , Historia Gothorum 37Google Scholar, MGH (AA) XI, 282.

⁹² Translation adapted from J. N. Hillgarth.

⁹³ Senatores and proceres are not necessarily mutually exclusive groups. In the Variae of Cassiodorus, proceres refers to high officials in the king's service, either Roman or Ostrogoth (Var. 4. 3. 1; 6. 4. 1). It is usually found in the plural and often designates the royal court (cf. Theodoric in the Acta of the Roman synod of 501, MGH (AA) XII, 425: ‘cum proceribus palatii mei’). Sometimes, in its plural form, the word refers to senators (Var. 9. 7. 6: ‘cum tot proceres ad curiam vocas’. Cf. also Var. 1. 41; 8. 15. 3).

⁹⁴ Jones II, 554–7. See also Veyne, P., Le Pain et le cirque (1976), 51–4Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ P. Brown, in response to Chadwick, op. cit. (n. 35), 18.

⁹⁶ Trans. J. N. Hillgarth.

⁹⁷ PLRE II, 537.

⁹⁸ Langgärtner, 131–3. See also Leclerq, H. in Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie XIII (1937), cols. 931–40Google Scholar.

⁹⁹ Epist. Arel. 28, op. cit. (n. 41), 41. By ‘Spania’ is probably meant Septimania, since the bishop of Seville was designated as vicarius by Pope Simplicius in the late fifth century. Cf. Thiel, A., Epistolae Romanorum Pontificum 1 (1867, repr. 1974), 213Google Scholar. For further arguments in favour of the point, see Langgärtner, 136–7.

¹⁰⁰ The phrase was used by Pope Hilarus in a letter written to Leontius of Arles, Veranus of Vence, and Victurus (see unknown) in the mid 460s, PL 58. 21. For a summary of these relations in the context of the Gallic episcopate, see Griffe 11, 169–212. See also Langprobably gärtner, passim.

¹⁰¹ Epist. Arel. 1, op. cit. (n. 41), 5–6.

¹⁰² Epist. Arel. 16, ibid., 23.

¹⁰³ Epist. Arel. 15, ibid., 22.

¹⁰⁴ Epist. Arel. 18, ibid., 27.

¹⁰⁵ Epist. Arel. 22, ibid., 33.

¹⁰⁶ It is perhaps worth recalling that Ausonius once described Arles as ‘Gallula Roma Arelas’ in his Ordo nobilium urbium, line 74, MGH (AA) v. 2, ed. C. Schenkl, 100.

¹⁰⁷ Epist. Arel. 12, op. cit. (n. 41), 18–19. For other references, see Epist. Arel. 1,3,5, ibid., 6, 9, 11. The present church of Saint-Trophime, located at the centre of Arles–perhaps on the site of Caesarius' basilica sancti Stephani—commemorates the saint to this day. For further discussion of the legend, see Levillain, L., ‘Saint Trophime confesseur et métropolitain d'Arles et la mission des sept en Gaul’, Revue d'histoire de l'église de France 13 (1927), 145–89Google Scholar, and Duprat, E., ‘Histoire des légendes saintes de Provence’, Mémoires de l'Institut historique de Provence 17 (1940), 146–98Google Scholar, and 18 (1941), 87–125.

¹⁰⁸ Ennodius, Ep. 9. 23, 29, and PLRE II, 677–81. On the date of Liberius' appointment to the praetorian prefecture, see most recently, O'Donnell, J. J., Traditio 37 (1981), 44–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁰⁹ Stein, E., Histoire du Bas-Empire II (1949), 155Google Scholar.

¹¹⁰ Arnold, op. cit. (n. 36), 271.

¹¹¹ Langgärtner, 121–4.

¹¹² Caspar, E., Geschichte des Papsttums 11 (1933), 88Google Scholar.

¹¹³ Pietri, C., ‘Le Sénat, le peuple chrétien et les partis du cirque à Rome sous le pape Symmaque’, MEFR 78 (1966), 123–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹⁴ ibid., 136–9.

¹¹⁵ ibid., 131.

¹¹⁶ Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, L., I (1955), 263Google Scholar.

¹¹⁷ cf. the Acta of the synod held in Rome in 502, MGH (AA) XII, 449.

¹¹⁸ Caesarius, Serm. 22. 2; 23. 4; 29. 1.

¹¹⁹ Serm. 134. 3, PL 38. 744.

¹²⁰ Especially Serm. 13 and 50–4.

¹²¹ Vita 1. 23; Serm. 123. 1.

¹²² Serm. 104. 6. See also Courreau, J., ‘Saint Césaire d'Arles et les Juifs’, Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique 71 (1970), 105–6Google Scholar.

¹²³ cf. for instance, ‘Videns autem Dominus, quod despiceret Liam, aperuit vulvam eius’ (Gn. 29: 31) and ‘Recordatus quoque Dominus Rachelis exaudivit earn et aperuit vulvam illius’ (Gn. 30: 22).

There are two substitutions made in the Vita: dam[p]nari has been inserted in place of the more typical concludere (Gn. 20: 18; I Sm. 1: 5, 6); and matris viscera has replaced vulva because it has a more direct reference to the church (Orosius, Apol. 30, PL 31. 1199; Caesarius, Serm. 200. 5; and Pope Pelagius II, PL 72. 707). For a similar analogy between Christian conversion and the birth of a child, see Caesarius, Serm. 128. 6.

¹²⁴ Supra, p. 190.

¹²⁵ Thompson, E. A., ‘Christianity and the Northern Barbarians’, in Momigliano, A. (ed.), The Conflict Between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century (1963), 77Google Scholar.

¹²⁶ ibid., 77–8.

¹²⁷ The Visigoths in the Time of Ulfila (1966), 55–63, 103–10, cited as Thompson.

¹²⁸ These communities are principally known through the missionaries they fostered, e.g. Ulfila (Thompson, xiii–xvii) and Patrick (Conf. 1, ed. Hanson, op. cit. (n. 22), 70). Cf. also Prosper, de voc. omn. gent. 2. 33, PL 51. 717, and Rufinus, HE 1. 10, PL 21. 480–2.

¹²⁹ Thompson, 62.

¹³⁰ CJ 8. 50. 20.

¹³¹ Lex Burgundionum, Liber Constitutionum, 56. 2 in MGH (Leges Nationum Germanicarum) 11. 1, ed. L. R. de Salis, 91: ‘si ingenuus rogans redemptus fuerit, pretium suum emptori reddat.’

¹³² Ep. 4. 17.

¹³³ Gregory, Ep. 9. 52: ‘ratio aequitatis exposcit ut, quod studio pietatis impensum est, ad redemptorum onus vel afflictionem non debeat pertinere.’

¹³⁴ The evidence comes from the shorter will of Remigius, MGH (SRM) III, 336–40, the probable authenticity of which was demonstrated by A. H. M. Jones, P. Grierson, and Crook, J. A. in ‘The Authenticity of the “Testamentum S. Remigii”’, Revue beige de philologie et d'histoire 35 (1957), 356–73Google Scholar.

In this document Remigius makes provisions for three individuals whom he has freed from captivity: ‘[Alarici] uxorem, quam redemi et manu misi, commendo ingenuam defendam’ (MGH (SRM) III, 338) and ‘Sunnoveifam, quam captivam redemi, bonis parentibus natam et eius filium Leuberedum’ (ibid., 339). The fact that he manumits these (originally free) redempti, along with those who are obviously slaves, shows that redeemed captives stood in fairly close relations of dependence with him. It is possible that they were, in some way, repaying the price of their ransom, although this makes Remigius' advice to the young Clovis, that he use his wealth for the redemption of captives, sound somewhat hollow (Epist. Austr. 2, MGH (Ep.) III, 113). It is perhaps just as likely that these Germans were unwilling to return to their homes after their redemption, and chose to become dependents of the bishop for their own protection. Their testamentary manumission would, on this interpretation, be merely a legal fiction which entitled them to claim a Roman status which they could only have had as liberti.

¹³⁵ In canon 2 of the Council of Lyon, CCL 148A, 232, provisions were made for bishops to issue letters of recommendation (epistolae commendationis) to those captives ‘in servitio pontificum consistentibus.’ In addition to clearly recognizable signatures, the letters were to include explicit dates (dies datarum), the prices established (precia constituta), and the needs of the captives (necessitates captivorum) whom the bishops were sending out with letters.

It is clear that these letters were intended to confirm the legitimacy of captives seeking the price of their redemption. (An illuminating and amusing incident of fraud is found in Vita 2. 23–4.) What is not clear is the legal status of the captives. Verlinden believed that they had already been redeemed by a bishop and were now seeking funds with which to repay him (Verlinden, C., L'esclavage dans l'Europe médiévale I (1955), 687Google Scholar). Lesne thought that they had not yet been redeemed, and were furnished with letters of recommendation to enable them to beg for ransom among wealthier congregations (Lesne, E., Histoire de la Propriété ecclésiastique en France 1 (1910), 365–7Google Scholar).

The fact that they are described as captivi throughout the canon, and are never referred to as redempti, slightly reinforces Lesne's position, but the phrase in servitio pontificum clearly describes some kind of dependence. The most we can say is that the bishops have somehow become temporarily responsible for these captivi, perhaps by redeeming them, perhaps by guaranteeing their ransom. None the less, the captives were still ultimately responsible for their own redemption, surely the ordinary state of affairs. We glimpse its consequences in several desperate vignettes in the Vita Caesarii, where captives or their near relations wandered from one Christian town to the next begging for the price of their ransom (Vita 1. 44; 2. 8, 23–4).

¹³⁶ Pardessus, J. M., Diplomata, Chartae, Epistolae, Leges, Aliaque Instrumenta ad res Gallo-Francicas Spectantia 1 (1843)Google Scholar, no. 230. There are two references in the will to the manumission of individuals whom the bishop had redeemed from captivity. The first involves redempti working at the villa Murocincto, who were to remain free while their fellow labourers were to be willed to the bishop's nephew and grand nephew: ‘[quos] ego de captivitate redemi, ipsi liberi perseverent’, p. 204. The second reference involves labourers on the villa Boalcha: ‘illi vero, quos de captivitate redemi, et ante ingenui fuerunt, et modo pro pretio servire videntur, tam viri quam mulieres de villa Boalcha omnes a servitio relaxentur’, p. 214. The expression pro pretio servire shows unambiguously that these redempti were repaying the bishop with their service as labourers.

¹³⁷ Finley, M. I., Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology (1980), 123–6Google Scholar.

¹³⁸ Vita Prima, 4–5 in Halkin, F. (ed.), Sancti Pachomii Vitae Graecae (1932), 3–4Google Scholar.

¹³⁹ Chitty, D. J., The Desert a City (1966), 7Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁰ A conversion due, as Gregory of Tours relates, to a prayer made in the desperate moments of combat and answered in victory, HF 2. 30. One cannot of course rule out the influence of Constantine's conversion on Gregory's account. But its plausibility is not thereby affected.

¹⁴¹ Sailer, R. P., Personal Patronage Under the Early Empire (1982), 22–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴² Bolkestein, H., Wohltätigkeit und Armenpflege im vorchristlichen Altertum (1939), 438–9, 483–4Google Scholar; Patlagean, E., Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4^e–7^esiècles (1977), 188–9Google Scholar.

¹⁴³ Wallace-Hadrill, op. cit. (n. 51), 15–16.