Page de données généalogiques 559 (Pages Notes)

Les individus marqués d'un point rouge

, sont les ancêtres directs de Estelle PARANQUE

" The recorded names of the alleged children of Bilichildis do not have a Merovingian ring about them. It is uncertain whether Bilichildis existed at all or whether she and her family were invented for the purposes of compiling a Merovingian descent for the Carolingian dynasty, an enterprise undertaken in Metz from the late 8th century onwards. Her absence from the list of the children of King Clotaire given by Gregory of Tours certainly suggests that she was a spurious later invention, although Gregory's treatment of the families of the early Merovingians was not exhaustive, as can be seen from the examples of Berthoara, daughter of King Theodebald I, and [Theodechildis] sister of the same king (see above), whom Gregory does not mention at all. Settipani demonstrates convincingly that there are sufficient indications in other primary sources that parts, if not all, these reconstructions may be based on historical fact"

Retour vers la page principale

"Gundobad King of Burgundy, in the Lex Gundobada, names as his predecessors "Gebicam, Godomarem, Gislaharium, Gundaharium, patrem quoque nostrum et patruum"[1]. It is assumed that this passage should be interpreted as referring to four named individuals and the king´s unnamed father and paternal uncle. The precise relationship with the four named individuals is unknown. It is even possible that there was no family relationship at all. Assuming for the moment that they were related, it is probable that the four are named in chronological order, starting from Gebica as the earliest predecessor. If this hypothesis is correct, Gundahar could have been King Gundobad´s grandfather. However, it is also possible that the four named individuals were contemporaries and not successors, maybe leaders of different Burgundian sub-groups which were later united under the common leadership of King Gundobad´s father after the Burgundians were settled by the Romans near Lake Geneva. Such a situation would recall the likely reality of Frankish leadership at the time the Franks first moved into Gaul (further discussed in the document MEROVINGIAN KINGS), and there appears no reason to suppose that the Burgundian model would in that respect have been any different. If that is correct, the regal title accorded in modern secondary sources to early Burgundian leaders would in practice have reflected few of the attributes which were subsequently linked to kingship. As can be seen there are many uncertainties relating to Gundahar, although he is known to history as GUNDAHAR [King] of the Burgundians. From a chronological point of view, it is probable that the rule of Gundahar was contemporary with the Burgundians´ first crossing into territory west of the River Rhine. Sécretan suggests that the Burgundian settlements at that time extended from Mainz to Strasbourg, with their capital at Worms[2]. However, it is unlikely that the Burgundians imposed any form of centralised administration on this territory. There is little evidence to suggest that any of the so-called barbarian peoples organised themselves into states, and imposed their authority on the indigenous populations, when they first migrated into western Europe. In this respect, Jordanes´s History of the Goths makes an interesting comment when naming “...Burgundiones...” among those who provided soldiers to the Roman army (“Franci, Sarmatæ, Armoriciani, Liticiani, Burgundiones, Saxones, Ripari, Olibriones, quondam milites Romani”)[3]. This passage suggests that the case of the Burgundians was similar to that of the other peoples who lived on the periphery of Roman jurisdiction and who provided many of the military volunteers who served in the Roman army with the later prospect of acquiring Roman citizenship. Idatius records that the rebellion of “Burgundiones” was suppressed by “Romanis duce Aetio”, dated to 436 from the context[4]. The Burgundians were defeated and dispersed by the Huns. The dating of events involving the early Burgundians presents extreme difficulties, the near contemporary primary sources rarely specifying dates. Sécretan discusses the different theories which place the Burgundian defeat by the Huns, and their dispersal into Gaul, anywhere between 436 and the mid-450s"

Retour vers la page principale

" It is not known whether Merovech, after whom the dynasty was named, was a purely mythical figure or if there is some factual basis for his existence. If he did exist, his precise ancestry is not known. Gregory of Tours writes that "some say that Merovech, the father of Childeric, was descended from Chlodio"[14] but this is the only reference he makes to Merovech in his work. The early 8th century Liber Historiæ Francorum names "Merovechus de genere eius" as successor to Chlodio, commenting that he gave his name to the dynasty[15]. Fredegar asserts, colourfully, that Merovech was conceived when Chlodio's wife went swimming and encountered a Quinotaur[16]. It is possible that Merovech succeeded Chlodio as leader of the Franks in Roman Gaul. Assuming that he did enjoy some sort of leadership role over some or all of the Frankish tribes in Gaul, it seems inappropriate to attribute the title "king" to Merovech. In the first place, it is likely that his leadership was localised. In addition, Roman domination continued until the overthrow in 476 of the last Roman Emperor in the West, Romulus Augustulus, and no documentary evidence has so far been found which suggests that there was a sub-level of Frankish administration under the Roman emperor, despite the fact that imperial authority was in decline during the later years.] "