Divine punishment through a signature

“Those who oppress the poor insult their Maker” reads the beginning of Proverbs 14:31. In fact, the Bible is full of instructions that one should care for the poor. This post will discuss the story of someone in Merovingian Gaul—an anonymous Burgundian—who did the opposite and was punished for this through a letter. The story provides a very interesting example of the reuse of a letter. It also shows that letters were not only a medium for transmitting messages but also objects in direct connection to the divine.

The story

The episode was recorded by Gregory, Bishop of Tours, in his Life of Nicetius of Lyons, which is found in his Vita Patrum, or Life of the Fathers.[1] The text contains the vitae of twenty saints, some short, some very long. They drew on material familiar to the bishop including the lives of his relatives and the stories of saints from Clermont or Tours.[2] Gregory likely revised the Vita Patrum until his death in 594.[3] This incident in the time of Nicetius can be dated to after the bishop’s death in 573 and before one of its supporting characters, Phronimius, moved to the see of Vence in 588. It took place at a location close to Lyon.

The story is told in only 26 lines of Latin, and can be divided into three parts.[4] In the first part, we learn of an unnamed poor man who obtained a letter from Nicetius. The poor man used the letter to beg for alms (elymosinam) at the houses of rich and devout Christians. When such people saw Nicetius’ signature on the letter, they gave the poor man money, even after Nicetius’ death.

A Merovingian solidus. Date: 491-518 CE. Source: The Fitzwilliam Museum (2025) “Solidus” Web page available at: https://data.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/id/object/199515 Accessed: 2025-05-21 16:29:26

In the second part, a Burgundian, who had no respect for the saint, saw the above happening. He followed the poor man to a forest, and attacked him, taking his letter and six golden coins (aureos, solidos). This was an enormous amount of money for a beggar, as one golden solidus could feed a person for months.[5] The poor man begged for his letter back, as it was his only way of supporting himself. The Burgundian reluctantly gave it back. Afterwards, the poor man went into the nearby town and asked a visiting bishop, Phronimius, for help.

In the final part, Phronimius reports the assault and robbery to the unnamed local count, who calls the Burgundian to him. We do not know how this Burgundian was found or summoned (the Latin used is vocatum) or whether the summons was in writing. Before his accusers, the Burgundian swears that he has never seen the poor man, and that he has not taken anything. The bishop looks at the letter, recognises Nicetius’ handwriting, and makes the Burgundian touch Nicetius’ signature while swearing that he is telling the truth. Punished for his disrespect by the power of the saint, the Burgundian falls into a coma, foaming at the mouth. When he wakes up, he confesses his crime. Phronimius arranges with the count that he is pardoned, and the golden coins are returned to the poor man with 2 solidi extra.

The letter itself and begging therewith

The poor man’s letter is described using both litterae and epistola, which were apparently equivalent for Gregory.[6] The Latin word used for obtained is ab eo elicuit, which can be translated as “elicited from him” or “enticed from him”. The use of elicuit is striking: if the letter was part of regular communication, a word like accipere would be expected. If the poor man did elicit the letter from Nicetius, it is unlikely he did so by writing him a letter and receiving a reply. When begging his attacker to return his letter, the poor man says ultra mihi non erit vita, “I have no means of living beyond it.” This seems to confirm that the man likely could not read or write, as this would have given him other means of earning a living. Taken together, Gregory’s specific Latin and the poor man’s socio-economic position suggest that the contents of the letter had nothing to do with the poor man and he might not even know what message it carried.

How then did he obtain the letter? It is possible that Nicetius knew of the practice of begging using objects related to bishops. Did the charitable bishop realise that instead of giving alms, it would be much more efficient to give one of his old letters to someone in need? Was begging using letters common practice? This would be a very interesting way of recycling otherwise useless correspondence. Even after Nicetius’ death, his letter did not lose its power. The poor man used the popularity of the saint to remind people of their Christian duty to give alms of the poor.

This story can be compared to other examples of the use of Christian symbols in begging. The Liber Vagatorum, a sixteenth-century text discussing different kinds of beggars, talks about Stabülers whose hats and cloaks are full of images of saints.[7] A modern study of begging in Rome discusses how some people beg outside of churches, often in a praying position and with a religious icon attached to their cup.[8] It thus seems that letters bearing the signature of a saint can be added to the list of objects that remind us that “happy are those who are kind to the poor”.[9]

The contents of the letter and the signature

Like the man, we are also unaware of the letter’s contents. It is only said that the letter bears the bishops signature (manu eius subscriptas). This signature is very interesting: while the poor man begs, everyone who sees the signature of the saint (quisque vidisset subscriptionem) gives him money. Nicetius’ signature, his name and title is thus something that is recognisable by people, even after his death. Furthermore, the contents of the letter are not relevant. It is only through the fact that something tangible written by the bishop is shown to people that they are convinced to give alms to the poor man.

It is unclear if the whole letter was written by the saint, or if a scribe wrote it and Nicetius only signed it. After the Burgundian’s denial during the trial, bishop Phronimius takes the letter, looks at the signature, and says it belongs to Nicetius. Again, the most important aspect of the letter is not its contents, but the signature which links it to the deceased bishop. When the bishop invites the Burgundian to proof his innocence, he asks him to “touch the handwriting which the saint himself wrote down” (tangens manu scripturam quam ipse depinxit). This could suggests that the whole letter was written by the saint, but a signature, possibly of multiple words, cannot be excluded.

The signature is thus treated as a conduit of the saint’s power, or even an extension of the saint himself. It is easily recognisable by others as belonging to Nicetius. Throughout the Vita Patrum, Gregory writes at length of the divine powers of a saint’s body or his tomb, and of objects that have been blessed by saints or had been used by saints: beds, herbs, towels, clothes, et cetera. Unlike these objects, the signature is presumably only touched once and never specifically blessed. However, it is just as powerful, punishing the Burgundian’s false oath. It thus seems that the signature is more than just a household object used by the saint. His signature is a tangible mark he left on the world, a tangible relic of his mind and being. Perhaps that is why it is portrayed as being so powerful.

Conclusions

The story of Nicetius’ letter shows that Merovingian letters could be used in surprising ways after their original purpose of delivering a message was complete. The story leaves us with questions: was the letter given to the poor man by Nicetius or someone else who knew that they could provide the poor man with a means of living? Were letters often recycled in such a way?

The story demonstrates the reverence people had for a bishop’s signature. It was treated not only as an identifier of the person who wrote it, but as an extension of the bishop himself. It was due to this signature that the poor man obtained six golden coins while begging, and the same signature put a criminal in a deep coma for two hours. Even though there must have been more written on the parchment of the letter, the signature was the only relevant part on this occasion. One must imagine that Saint Nicetius must have loved that a letter of his, likely on worldly matters, was used completely outside of its intended use to remind his fellow Christians of their duties towards the poor. In a way, the letter thus obtained a separate and new message not written on the parchment through his signature: “Those who are generous are blessed, for they share their bread with the poor”.[10]

[1] Gregory of Tours, Liber Vitae Patrum, ed. Bruno Krusch, MGH rer. Merov. 1,2 (Hanover, 1885), pp. 240-252; trans. Edward James, Gregory of Tours: Life of the Fathers (Liverpool, 1991), pp. 49-64. The introduction of the Gregory’s work is partly dedicated to a discussion on why he calls it Vita Patrum instead of Vitae. It is because he believes all these men followed the same life of a holy man.

[2] James, Life of the Fathers, p. XIV.

[3] James, Life of the Fathers, pp. IX-X, XII, XXVI.

[4] Gregory of Tours, Liber Vitae Patrum, cap. 9, pp. 249-250.

[5] James, Life of the Fathers, p. 36.

[6] See R. Flierman, ‘Gregory of Tours and the Merovingian Letter, Journal of Medieval History, 47:2 (2021), pp. 191-144, here 123-124. I do note that this is not always the case: he often uses litterae to refer to the “studying of letters”, and epistola to refer to the Biblical epistles.

[7] For the 1528 press with preface by Martin Luther, The Book of Vagabonds and Beggars, with a Vocabulary of their Language, trans. John Camden (London, 1860), pp. 9-10. This can be consulted online at Project Gutenberg: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/46287/46287-h/46287-h.htm#Page_8.

[8] B. Thomassen, ‘Begging Rome: Norms at the margins, norms of the in-between’, Critique of Anthropology 35:1 (2015), pp. 94-113, here 103.

[9] Proverbs 14:21, translation from the New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition, 2021.

[10] Proverbs 22:9, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition, 2021.