History of the Franks

Among the narrative records of civilization inaccessible to those whose reading is confined to English texts, few are of greater historical interest than the History of the Franks by Gregory of Tours. The reason that it has remained so long untranslated into English is clear, however, to any one who has ever seriously considered the problem of which at least a partial solution is offered here. In the first place, although part of Gregory’s narrative deals with events and men of great importance, there are long sections dealing with happenings which in themselves are not worth our remembering. Yet, if one views the work as a source for the history of society rather than merely as a narrative of the acts of kings, queens, or saints, it is often these relatively unimportant events which are most instructive and interesting; for Gregory’s picture of manners and customs is given by way of a story of what real people actually did and said. It follows from this, that, if our main interest in the History of the Franks is in its picture of the life and customs of the times, we must find that picture in what is often but a repetition of royal murders, social disorder, and turmoil, lightened only by the equally persistent repetition of saintly virtue. The editorial problem of how much or how little of such data to include is naturally one of considerable difficulty. In the next place, the historical value of the text varies, according as Gregory dealt with past or present; so that, viewed as a narrative of fact, the later portions have a much greater claim for preservation than the earlier. If one were attempting to show what Gregory contributed to our knowledge, one would be obliged to concentrate, therefore, upon these later sections, and even there the value varies. But, viewing the History of the Franks as itself an exhibit of the age which it records, we find ourselves often more interested in what Gregory does not know of the past than in what he does know of the present. In the very limitation of outlook, in the choice of incident and arrangement of perspective, the narrative of distant eventsreveals the state of culture of Merovingian Gaul in Gregory’s day. Hence, for the history of thought and society, the poorest part of Gregory’s work ranks in importance with the best.

It might be urged that the one solution for these editorial problems would be to offer a translation of the whole of Gregory’s work. But this, aside from the cost of publication, seems too great a bulk of text for all but special students of the period, who should in any case go to the original. The student of European history in its larger aspects, to whom one Childebert is like another, demands an anthology; for he finds the text so crowded with similar incidents that he is likely not only to lose the thread of the narrative but also to fail to appreciate the sections most significant for his own purpose. In the circumstances, a middle course has been taken. The chapters omitted are summarized and in cases where they contain any items of special interest sections of them have been quoted in the summary. This work of excision and condensation has been made with the ever-present sense of the protest sure to come from the medievalist when he sees the work of desecration at last accomplished which Gregory himself so sadly feared, and upon the authors of which he called down the wrath of Heaven throughout all eternity, in the forceful words on page 247 of this translation. It is only to be hoped that a new social value—which anthropologists tell us is the basis of the sacred—may justify the sacrilege.

With reference to the text itself, the translator has attempted to follow the original as faithfully as possible. It is difficult to render into another language Gregory’s combination of literary qualities, the chief of which are vigor, crudity, and a frequent affectation of literary style; but this, we believe, Dr. Brehaut has succeeded in accomplishing in a marked degree. There are chapters which have the charm of Froissart, swift in motion and tinged with romance; but the most romantic figure of all is the bishop of Tours himself, whose quaint but shrewd outlook penetrates the whole; and this impression of subjectivity the present version seeks to convey.