Sworn to betray. Written oaths and broken promises in Julian of Toledo’s Historia Wambae regis

 “If you have already traversed the harsh and uninhabitable cliffs of the mountains, if you have already broken deep into the forest by narrow passes, like the lion of mighty breast, if you have utterly defeated the goats at running, the deer at springing, and the bears and wild pigs in voracity, if you have already disgorged the venom of snakes and vipers, make this known to us, warrior, make this known to us, lord, friend of forests and crags. For if all these have collapsed before you and you are now hastening towards us in order to repeat for us at length the song of the nightingale, and on that account, splendid man, your heart rises in self-assurance, then come down to Clausurae, for there you will find a mighty champion with whom you may legitimately fight.” (Epistola Pauli perfidi, translated by Joaquín Martínez Pizarro, 175-176)

With these taunting words, Julian of Toledo opened his Historia Wambae regis. In 672, king Wamba sent his general Paul with an army to Gallia to quell an uprising there. However, Paul had other ambitions. Rather than putting down the rebellion, Paul betrayed his oath to the king, sided with the rebels, and crowned himself king. He then sent this bold letter of challenge to Wamba, inviting the king to battle. What followed in the Historia was Wamba’s victorious campaign against the rebellion, ending with a trial in Nîmes that hinged on the power of written oaths. Through an exploration of oaths – both spoken and written – in the Historia Wambae, this blog will show that the written oaths shaped the narrative of the trial. They were not only legal formalities, but provided undeniable, textual proof of Paul’s betrayal – the triumph of the written word.

Another contested oath: Harald Hardrada depicted swearing an oath in support of William of Normandy on the Bayeux Tapestry (scene 23). Date: 1070s. Source: Wikipedia Commons, Public Domain.

The king’s oath and the rebel’s oath in the Historia Wambae regis

Oaths first appear in the second part of the Historia Wambae. Julian drew a stark contrast between the election and coronation of Wamba and that of Paul. Julian represented Wamba’s election as legitimate. He was chosen by the “consensus of the people and the fatherland” (totius gentis et patriae communio).[1] His coronation, moreover, is represented as a divinely blessed event. After swearing his loyalty to both God and his people, Wamba was anointed. A miraculous sign followed the anointment: the oil on his forehead began to smoke, and a bee was seen emerging from the same spot. Paul’s election, on the other hand, was far from honorable. After breaking the oath, he had sworn to king Wamba, Paul persuaded the rebels to rally behind him in his revolt. The only thing which Paul swore (iurat) before these rebels, was that he could not “have Wamba as his king or remain in his service.”[2] Then:

“[…] one of the plotters, an accomplice of his evil schemes, Ranosindus, chooses Paul to be his king; he will have Paul and no other as the future ruler of this people. When Paul perceived this swift coming to fruition of his designs, he promptly supplied the consent of his own will, and compelled all men to swear oaths to him [“iurare etiam sibimet omnes coegit”].” (Historia, c. 8; Martínez Pizarro, 189)

According to Julian of Toledo, Paul’s rise to kingship was a “criminal election” (nefaria electione). Paul’s deceitful and manipulated ascent contrasted sharply with Wamba’s rightful election and divinely blessed coronation. In fact, Paul had to coerce (coegit) his allies into swearing allegiance to him, forcing them to take an oath to secure their loyalty and his own position. However, Julian of Toledo leaves the nature of these oaths unclear. Were they simply spoken pledges, or did those who swore them also sign a formal written agreement? These contrasting episodes set the stage for the trial of Paul in Nîmes.

Written Oaths on Trial: Legitimacy, Performance, and Preservation

Paul’s trial is documented in two parts: Julian made a brief reference to it at the end of the Historia, while a more detailed account is preserved in the anonymous Iudicium, a record of the court case, appended to the Historia.[3] In the Iudicium, it is told how Paul and his allies were tried for breaking their oath and their other crimes in Nîmes in 673, before the eyes of the king, the army, the elders, the gardingi, and other palatine officials. At the trial, the triumphant Wamba asks Paul why the general sought to usurp his throne. Had Wamba, as king, done anything to deserve such betrayal? Paul offers no justification for his rebellion, instead stating that Wamba has done him no wrong whatsoever. Given the number of witnesses present at the trial, this spoken testimony and confession of Paul alone might have been sufficient. Yet, the anonymous author of the Iudicium recorded that there was also solid written evidence against Paul. Soon after his spoken testimony:

“[…] the oaths were brought forth in which by a voluntary promise the most evil Paul himself and his associates, together with the rest of us, had consented in the election of our glorious lord, King Wamba, and sworn, taking the divine power as surety, that they would keep unbroken faith to him and to the land, which they also confirmed with the signature of their hands. These oaths having been opened and read, the signatures of their hands on these very promises are displayed for them to see, to the confusion of their treachery.” (Iudicium, c. 6; Martínez Pizarro, 237-238)

The oaths (conditiones) that Paul and his allies had sworn and signed during Wamba’s election in 672 were followed by a second set of oaths, as recounted by the anonymous author. The oaths that Paul had coerced his allies into swearing were similarly presented and read aloud. To everyone present at the trial, including the judge, the contradiction between these two oaths left no doubt: Paul and his allies were guilty of oath-breaking (perfidia) and rebellion (seditio).

What makes this references to and the performance around the written nature of oaths in the anonymous Iudicium so unique? Information about oaths in the Visigothic period typically comes from prescriptive texts, such as synodal decrees, council acts, and legal texts. Legal texts such as the Liber Iudiciorum and the Formulae Visigothicae provide guidelines on oaths, including written oaths, and outline the circumstances in which they could serve as evidence in legal cases. These sources reflect normative ideals. The Iudicium, however, is a different genre: a narrative and stylized account of an actual court case, which offers us a new perspective on the use of oaths.

The reference to the written nature of the oaths in the Iudicium must, first of all, be understood within the broader context of concerns about loyalty, authority, and oaths in the Visigothic kingdom. Before the Historia Wambae, seventh-century synods, councils, and legal texts such as the Liber Iudicium were already concerned about the stability of the kingdom and the role of oaths in preserving stability. Canon 75 of the Fourth Council of Toledo (633), for instance, was written “for the strength of our kings and the stability of the Goths.”[4] It emphasized that oaths of loyalty sworn by the nobility, bishops, clerics, and the people were sacred (fidem sacramento promissam regibus suis) and inviolable. Those who broke their oath and rebelled against the king faced harsh penalties, such as blinding, excommunication, death, and the threat of eternal damnation. For Visigothic kings, whose courts were plagued by the infighting of noble factions, such oaths were crucial for maintaining their own authority and upholding the stability of the kingdom by ensuring loyalty to the king and the fatherland – even if, as the Historia Wambae shows us, they were broken as often as they were sworn.

How did the author use this sacred and inviolable character of oaths in the Iudicium? The author remarkably transformed the introduction of the written oaths in his narrative from a simple presentation into a dramatic performance. He particularly uses the materiality of the oaths in his record, highlighting the significance of the signatures (subscriptionibus) on the documents. The oaths were brought forth (prolatae sunt), opened (reseratis), and read aloud (perlectis) for all to hear. Then the signatures are displayed openly to those present (eis aspicienda ostenditur). The signatures on the oaths sworn to Wamba are repeatedly described as being “of their hands” (manus eorum), emphasizing that these oaths were not coerced but were instead signed “by a voluntary promise”.[5] This performance around the oaths in the trial makes us wonder: why did the author emphasize their materiality and written nature?

The emphasis on displaying the signatures calls to mind the practice of contropatio, a Visigothic legal procedure in which handwriting and signatures on legal documents were carefully and expertly scrutinized to confirm their authenticity. By invoking this practice, the authority of written documents, or in this case written oaths, is reinforced. The written oaths served as evidence and as instruments of persuasion in the trial; their introduction and display left no room for doubt about the guilt of Paul and his allies in the eyes of both the court and the reader. After the presentation of the written oaths and the signatures on them, sentences from the Fourth Council of Toledo and the Liber Iudiciorum are brought forth and their punishment is read aloud. Together with the written and signed oaths, it is only logical and just to the audience that Paul and his allies are condemned. Without a doubt, the audience “could no longer hesitate or fear” to punish them.[6]

The written oaths in the Iudicium also invite other reflections. Continuing with the signatures, we might wonder about literacy at this time in the Visigothic kingdom. A large audience had gathered at this trial: naturally, the king was present, but so were his army, palatine officials, the gardingi, and others. Could everyone in the audience read these oaths and the signatures on them? How did illiterate or semi-literate persons in the audience perceive the presence of a signature on such a document? The written oaths in the Iudicium thus also bring forth other questions, about the broader significance of written documents as symbols of power, authority, and legitimacy, which could be recognized and accepted by literate and illiterate people alike.

Finally, the use of written oaths in the trial of Paul raises questions about the preservation of such documents. The oaths sworn to Wamba date back to his coronation in Toledo a year before this trial, which prompts us to consider how and why these records were maintained. Julian of Toledo, in his Historia, also referenced two letters written by Paul: the opening letter, and a letter addressed to Amator, the bishop of Gerona. The entire Historia Wambae thus contains and references three documents written or signed by Paul. Were all these documents collected, preserved in a ‘personnel file’[7], and brought all the way to Nîmes during the campaign? The translator of the Historia Wambae, Joaquín Martínez Pizarro, notes it is possible that these were written documents preserved and consulted during the trial, and later used by Julian of Toledo when he compiled his history of the case.

Conclusion: signing an oath, sealing a fate

The Historia Wambae regis presents a striking portrayal of the written word as an instrument of both authority and condemnation. The trial of Paul in Nîmes as portrayed in the Iudicium as both a legal proceeding and a staged performance where the written word held undeniable weight. Paul could not go back on his (written) word: once it was committed to parchment, it served as a testament to his intentions and actions. Paul could not deny that he broke the oath he had sworn to Wamba. The emphasis on signatures and their public presentation suggests that even those who could not read may have at least recognized the symbolic power of these written documents.

The inclusion of the written oaths in the Historia Wambae regis underscores the triumph of the written word. Ultimately, Paul’s downfall is not only the result of his actions. The very words he once swore, preserved in writing, served as undeniable proof of his treachery. In signing these oaths, he and his allies sealed their fate.

Primary sources

Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos, edited by José Vives. Barcelona: Consejo Superiod de Investigaciones Científicas, Instituto Enrique Flórez, 1963.

Julian of Toledo, Historia Wambae regis. In Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum 5, edited by Wilhelm Levison. Hannover and Leipzig: Hahn, 1910.

Julian of Toledo, The Story of Wamba. Julian of Toledo’s Historia Wambae regis, translated by Joaquín Martínez Pizarro. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2005.

Literature

Barrett, Graham. “Ordeal by Innocents. The Law and Liturgy of Trial by Water in Early Medieval Iberia.” In Lincoln Readings of Texts, Materials, and Contexts. Supplementum to Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Sources, edited by Graham Barrett and Louise J. Wilkinson. Leeds: Arc Humanities Press, 2024.

Castillo Lozano, José Ángel. “La figure del tyrannus, del rebelde, en la tradición visigoda a través de las obras de Julián de Toledo.” Herakleion 7 (2014): 85-101.

Claude, Dietrich. “The Oath of the Allegiance and the Oath of the King in the Visigothic Kingdom.” Classical Folia 30, no. 1 (1976): 4-26.

Collins, Roger. Visigothic spain 409-711. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006.

Esders, Stefan. “Loyalty Oaths and the Transformation of Political Legitimacy in the Medieval West.” In Oaths in Premodern Japan and Premodern Europe, edited by Philippe Buc and Thomas D. Conlan. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences, 2023.

De Jong, Mayke. “Adding Insult to Injury: Julian of Toledo and his Historia Wambae.” In The Visigoths. From the Migration Period to the Seventh Century. An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by Peter Heather. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 1999.

Frighetto, Renan. “Incauto et inevitabili conditionum sacramento: Juramento de fidelidad y limitación del poder regio en la Hispania visigoda en la reinado de Egica (688).” Intus Legere Historia 1 (2007): 67-79.

Marlasca Martínez, Olga. “Los actos jurídicos documentados en los textos legales visigodos.” Estudios de Deusto 58, no. 1 (2010): 79-113.

King, P.D. Law and Society in the Visigothic Kingdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

Reimitz, Helmut. “The Promise of History: Oaths in Frankish Historiography.” In Oaths in Premodern Japan and Premodern Europe, edited by Philippe Buc and Thomas D. Conlan. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences, 2023.

Velázquez, Isabel. “PRO PATRIAE GENTISQVE GOTHORVM STATV (4^th Council of Toledo, Canon 75, A. 633).” In Regna and Gentes. The Relationship between Late Antique and Early Medieval Peoples and Kingdoms in the Transformation of the Roman World, edited by Hans-Werner Goetz, Jörg Jarnut, and Walter Pohl. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

References

[1] Hist., c. 2, 501.

[2] Hist., c. 8, 507

[3] Martínez Pizarro 2005, 80-81.

[4] Velázquez 2003, 199.

[5] Iudicium, c. 6, 533-534.

[6] Iudicium, c. 7, 534; Martínez Pizarro 2005, 238.

[7] Martínez Pizarro 2005, 165-166.