Odoacer: German or Hun?

Robert L. Reynolds; Robert S. Lopez

The American Historical Review, Vol. 52, No. 1. (Oct., 1946), pp. 36-53.

Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8762%28194610%2952%3A1%3C36%3AOGOH%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y

The American Historical Review is currently published by American Historical Association.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/aha.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Fri May 18 08:47:53 2007 HE history of the migrations which marked the downfall of both the TIiarn~nEmpire in the West and the I-lan Empire in China is still very obscure. "Nowhere, since the time of Alexander the Great, do we feel so strongly that the meagrencss of the scurces flouts the magnitude of the cvcn~s."' L'nfor~~~nately,tlie starting point, hence the guiding thread of all these migrario:ls. lics in Central Asia, ~vliosepolitical, cconomic, and cultural history will in most of its Jet&!s renlain to us a blank page. For even such remote and belated repercussions of Cen~rnl-.\siaticevents as took place within the view of the chssic world are 1:;1t diinly sho::.n to us in cursory, contradictory, and ofien unreliable sourccs. 'l'o be sure, nen. archae:)!ogical and philologicsl material has been piling up in the !st two or three

'Dr. Reynolcls is professor of history in thc University of Wisconsin and Dr. Lopez L assistant proicswr ot h~story~n Yale Univers~ty. J. B. Uury, History 01 tlie Later I

"T: basic general ~sorksare those of Eduard IVictersheim, Geschichte der L'ol~erwandrrr~ng (2d ed., Felix Ihlln, Leipzig. 1880-81) and Ludwig Scl;midt, Allkcnici:ie Grsrhichic drr gernit:::isihen Viilkev (hl~inchen-Berlin. 1909) and Geschzchtc der dclitsrhen Slanime bis zrrm :!rts~ai~gcder T*'ali\e~.wu~~derritig(Berlin. I 9 I 0-1 8) ; also Alfons Dopsch, Iliirtsclinjtlirhe and so:ialc G~a:ni!lcye~ider etoo:uisc!iei> Kzilttrt.entwic~lr~~ig(zd ed., W~en,1923-24); Torsten E. Karbtcn, Les iz:cirtir Gci.niaii?s (Paris. 1931 ); N. Ahe:g, h'ordisihe Owanientik in r,orgrschrcht- !ic/ier Zeit (Leiimg, 1931)~tvith bibliography. We are particiilarly indebted to Professors Sidney Fish, Ernst IIerzfeld, Karl Menpes, and .ifartin Sprengling, and to Dr. Orkhan Yirmibesh for [heir valuable sugges~ions,without which this paper could not have been written. It gou without saying that they cannot be responsible for the judgments expressed in it. 38 Robert L. Reynolds and Robert S. Lopez For the purpose we find in the ll'estern zources the names of a number of key persons: Odoacer; his father, Edicon; his son, Thelan or OLlan; his brother, Munoulplius. Bits of the careers of each are revealed. With their names were associated the tribes or groups of the Torcilingi, Sciri, , and Rogians, or Rugians, concerning whose histories there are also frasments of information. For philological work there are these and some othcr names.'

The Torcilingi (some manuscripts carry the spelling "Turcilingi") are to us little more than a name. They appear in the extant sources only In the IIijtoriu hliscelfa of Landulphus Sagax they are listed with those nations which under 's command tool< part in the battle of ChlZlons. The state- ment is unconfirmed by other sources. V?liile tile iiistoj.ic~is itself a late and unreliable chronicle, it includes some materials from earlier and hctter sources ~vhichhavc iiot come don-n to us. In the list of Landulphus, t!le Torcilingi appear jointly with the S~iri.~ Tl~eTorcilingi are mentioned the other time in the account of Jorcianes- once more, jointly wit11 the Sciri-as forming the core of the tribes or mer- cenary bands of mliich Ocloaccr was the leader when he deposed Iiomulus Augustulus. refers to the Torcilingi three times, but only and always in connection with a single event: Odo~er'sseizing of power over . After that, we hear no more of the Torcilingi, not even in conilection with OJoacer's later career.' Furthermore, Jordanes is the only firsthand source calling Odoacer king of the Torcilingi; most oiten Ocloacer is called king of tlle Sciri or a S~irian.~Neither Landulphus nor Jordanes supplies a scrap of information as to the race, language, mode of life, origins, or earlier where- abouts of the Torcilingi. Nevertheless, the German scholars of the nineteenth century built up a pedigree and a Lebensraztnz for these obscure "ancestors." Since the Torcilingi were mentioned (in the fifth century) in company with the Sciri, it was de- duced that the two peoples had been neigtibors and kinsmen in the first cen- Jordanes, M.G.H., Artct. Ant., V, Get., 70, IX. See appendix to this essay, p. 51 below. GI

10 Uesitles Schoer~ield,S.U. "Thorcilingi" and p. 289, see Schmidt, Allgem. Gesch., p. 135, anti id., Gesclr., I, jqg-jo; Gudmund Schiitte, 011r Foi.efuther.s, rhe Goihonic Nuiions (Carn- blitlge, ~grg),11, 29; G. Romano, Le donliniz;ioni bui,i;ur.iche in ltnlia (Milan, ~gog),p. 46, etc. 11. iviach, s.rs. "Turcilingi." Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Enzylil., and Det~tsclie Stunznzesl(nnde (Berlin- Leipig, ~gzo),pp. ~zj-26, gets rid of all problen:~ by assuming that the term is just another naltle for Sciri. Especially, ci. Mkllcnhoti, as cited in note 6 above. 11 Tlie cnd product of a century of scholarship with a "Gernlanic bent" is perhaps this quorC~tionfsurn Schiitte, it, 29, "No ancient lli3torian or law cotlex states that there existed a special (Gothonic) branch emb:acing Rugians, Sciri, and Torci!ingi. Thcse tribes may be called sup~rnunierarymembers of the East C;o:honic sub-group. . . . Owing to occasional co-operation at certain times, they may most conveniently be consitlered unties a common heading." There is, however, norl~ing to criticize in the consc~entious scientific work which goes with these as- sumptions. l2 Kar-luk is probably a farfetched analogy; its etymology is not established; Togrul seems a fairly plausible root, ~vitha little nletathesis. There is the Petcheneg princely name, Turak, ci. tiyula Nkrnrih, Insc/ii.~/te~;des Schat-es rorz h'ugy-Szent-Jliklds (Budapest-Leipzig, 1932)~ PP 30-31. 13 C. Balbo, Son?matio della storiu d'ltalia, IV, chap. v; E. Blochet, "Les noms des Turks dans le chapltre x de la Gbnkse," I

l4 hli~l~isprinis the text ir~his appendixes. Rosrovtzeff holds for an early date (say, early d-~irdcentury, B.c.). P)ut for ~tl~ercOII:rnents, with basic etlition of the text: Corpus 1nsuip:ionurn Gracnirrrm, 20j8, himscif apparently found death in the battle. Munou1pI:~~sct:capct! xiitii 3 fallowing to Ccnstantinople, where he rebuilt his powcr as n (-onn1otzic,~ein the imperial service. 50011 after t1:e Scirian disaster, Odoacer, another soil oi Etiicon, began a cnrec-r quite parallel to that of Nunoulphus, but under , in italy. Thc httcr ~lsedhim in the struggle against (472). Four years latcr, the uprising of the barbarian mercenaries against Orestcs anci his soil, I~omulusi2ugustulus, gave Odoacer and his Sciri and Torcilingi and tlreir ;tssoci<~tcs,tl;c rule of Italy. It is very likely that Odoacer set in nation his plotting in azretment with I-Iunoulphus, \vho was just at that momait at the height of his influence at the eastern court. Some years later, I-Iunoulphus, fallen into disgrace with Emperor , joined Odoacer in Italy, with a small boclygu;ird. Thus both remnants of the Scirian group, scattered after the battlc of the Liolia, were joined again, about 486. But in 488 the last days of the Sciri began: , fall(xl;ed by tllr Ostrogothic people and a train of lesscr groups, and baciied in the enter- prise by Zeno, descended upon Italy. After long and bloocly fighting, Odoaccr n.as drfeated and then treacherously murdered (h4arch 3,393).18The nearest rclnr ii,i.s of Odoacer were killed at once upon Theodoric's orders; many of his Col!o:.:cr: nere 1;illed by mobs. After that, like the Tosciiingi, the Sciri disap- pc.ar, r::i\.:. a few simple peasants of the name, left in t!~B::!kans aild laown to jord:il;~-.'' Oi?c 11c)~ibilityrcrnaills, though the evidence is insecure, that ionlc sort of Sciri yct sicrvived. Jordane::' list of the peoples ~i-:lo rcinained faithful to .Ittila's son. !;cngesich, iilc1uci:s Ultzinzures, Bitiugurcs. Bardore?, and tlngi- j:-iri, n.hc;--~ccortli:lg t:, the writer in Pauly-Il'iqsowa, S.V. "I-iunni"--"evi- tiently !>car 'Turkish-Hunnic nnmes."I7 Nol;., a; :or:. I'ales. On the cpos which pictured Odoaccr as the be~rayer,nut the betrayed, cj. Schmidt, Gesrh., I, 163: Schiitte, 11, 35. lCSources and bibliography on the Sciri are listccl in Schn~idt,Grscl:., I, 350 ff.; Schiiite, 11, 30 ff.; I<. K;erschmer, "Sciri," Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Enzyi(1. '7 Jortlanes, Grr., 128. LIII. The words in quotation marks are from Kiessling, "I-Iunni," Paul) -L'v'~srow:l, &a!-Enzyl itrtainly \tcrc nat Germans, but iraniaiis), anLatin clarz, splendidi), or because of their innocence (as in candid, sii2cerz'), or because of racial purity (reinen, zrn~~em~ischten).A Danish scholar has no doubt: the Sciri were "the pure ones."'" By way of suggestion, it can be mcntioned that a very common word in modern Persian and in Pahlavi, shb,might be considered. The word has two quite difierent meanings: "milk" and "lion." Steppe peoples rely and have relied upon milk; but "lion" has always been an attractive n:tme to peoplcs. In old Persian, shir in the sense of "lion" would have been slzagr, and the fall of the g may have taken place quite early;20 it can be conjectured that the name among the Scytho-Sarrnatians was similar. But if there was any substance under Pliny'c test, his Sciri lived in lancls nox postulated to have been the ancestral homes of Baltic or Slai.lc tribes, or evtin of Finns. Pcrhaps etynlalo- gizing with those languages should be attempted. Sciri and Torcilingi are said to linvc fortncd thz main elertlcnt among the mercenaries who revolted against Romiilus i2ugustulus anti hailed Odoacer as rex ge?zrizrnl. Long before Odoacer reached this position, his father and brorher had lieen leaiiers of the Sciri. Hon-ever, most of the sources a150 mention :!]at I-leruls and Rugians, or Rogians, werc incluiiecl in the iclloming of Ocloacer in 476. There is no need for the Heruls to have been rclatetl by blond or spcech to the others; Sarmntic illans joined up with Ger:nanic \'andalq, Germanic 1,ombartis mad: comincn cause with ?ifongolic (?)Avars against Germanic (?)Gepitls, and so on. It may be granted that tile Heruls apparently ivcre Germanic dcspitc the fact that most of tile personal names of their lcaders hnfle German pllilolo- gists.2' 111 any case, oclj a fraction of tlle Hcruli could have been included in the nlised bands which foll'ollowed the fleeting fortune of Ocloacer. A11 indepen- dent kinSdom of tlle Hcruls, back in Europe's interior, is often mentioned long after OJoricer's fail, and various leaders of Herul troops fouzht over Europe and the Ncar East and Africa, for their own accounts or in Byzantine

I", Much. "Skiren," JZenl-Le- ikon der kern~nnischen Al/ri~i~~~j~r:ntle.Schiirre, 11, 29, acltls, "l'lic Sciri bclong to a serics of (Gothonic) tribes csiih natiies of the short type." Inciclen- tally-aritl ti~isac;ounts for so unusual a classiiiiaiion-he works out a theory which is de- veloped in various ways in his studies, to the effect th-t s!iort narnes tvere the original Gerinanic type but that longer co~npound narnes spreacl from Ostrojiotliic begi~~nin,qastarting about the time \\,hen the I-Iuns came to do:ninate. He does not connect the two p!rcnomena. One niight suggest tiiat the longer compoiind names follow polys\llabic Iranian pattcrris as well as 1.e- sembling the "worti-built" p-tccrn of Turkic names. Cf. especially Schiitte, 1, 187 ff. "Tf.,for instance, E. S. D. n!rarucha. Pnli/ai,i-Pd-end-English Glossn~~j~,p. 245. " \Ve fin~iatii<,nA the tlsi i:ls an Oclrus, wl-.ich ap!xars 1r;lnian; an Aortlits rvhic!i a!,pears to be bast.(l on ihc natiie of the Sa:matisn Aorsi; ant1 e\.en a Veriis, which is qui:e Roman. N:imes wliic!l "souncl" perhaps I>acian were An~lonnoballus, Da:ius, Faras, Alvi:h, for whish neither Fijrsteniann nor SchocnfelJ ollers a Germanic etynio1o:;y or can ofer one on!). or1 the supposition that Greek sources misspelled the name. Only Halaricus, Rodvulf, and F~rlcaris yield results to Gcrmanic etymology. Odoacer: German or Hun? 43 service. The Heruis are variously depicted by Greek and Roman observers as daring seamen, as escellent cavalrymen, or as fierce, naked warriors fighting exclusively afoot! They remind one of the Northmen--Varangians-R6s- of the eighth to the twelfth centuries. They apparently migrate through other peoples, they adapt themselves and their fighting techniques to the most various circumstances, they pick up outlandish names-and maybe ~vomenfoikand speech?-they serve bravely for pay, and they found lting- Joms ~vhichvanish agc~in.22 The Rugi~ns,or Rogians, counted by Jordanes among the peoples of Odoacer, were probably Germanic, ifthey were the same Rugians whose king Odoacer hilled and \~lloirkingdom he destroyed. Two branches of one folk often fought; there Liere the bitter struggles between the Ostrogoths of Theodoric Strabo and the Ostrogoths of Theodoric the Great; there were the Fran!tish civil nars of the hlerovingians and Carolingians; the Norse leaders fought each other, and so on. But it really is strange-and has ~uzzledall scllolars who have touched the problem-nhy no source hinted that a king hailed Ly at least some Rugians as their lcader should throughout his reign have been the Rugians' enemy." The socrces carefully n ention that when Theo- doric marched against Odoacer, one of the formcr'r rclzs v;as to pose as avenger of the Rugian king Odoacer had executed. Earlier, when Odoacer destroyed the Rugian kingdom, he resett!ed in Italy a number of Romans from those lands above the Brenner Paqs, but he was content sirrlply to wreck the power of the Rugians, without trying to become their king. In no case, in other words, did Odoaccr beha~eas \re shoulcl expect a Rugian princeling to have behaved, nor is tliere contemporary commenc on such conduct of his. It is necessary to note that our source which connects Odoacer with some sort of Rugian 0)following does not-precisely in that passage-spell the tribal name as any other author spells it, or as he (this is Jordanes) himself spt.lls the name nhen writing about the enemy Rugians whom Odoacer destroyed. I11 the latter ca5e he spells wit11 a u; Odoacer's enemies wcre Rzlginns. In the former case he uses an o; Odoacer was a Rogian or had Rogians in his train. Jordanes had occasion in three different pdssages to refer to the events til~iclibrought Odoacer to power. Once he does not mention any "Rogian"

22 Sources ar~dbibliography in Schmidt, Gesch., I, 333 ff; Karsten, pp. 75-76; Rappaport, "Hcruli." I'auly-Wissowa, Reat'-E~rzylil.Sevcral classic and iiostclass~cwriters mention the Heruls as "Scyti~ians," but sa\e that it ~niplictlthe author thought theley lived the nomad life, the term, of coursc, hdcl no clas\ifi~atoi.~significance. ':' l'aul L),.lc.. HIS!. Lnilg., 1, 19, tried in a curious way to explain why Otioacer, whom Jordanes h~cicalled X'o;i~sor king of the Roginns, should have waged war against the Rugians. The Lombrlrd historian built up the assumption that while Odoacer ruled part of the people, the rest were his enemies. Cf. Schrnitlt, Gesch., I, 325 A. 44 Robert L. Rejrtold, and Robert S. Lop22 follow~r:"Torcilingotum rr.y hzli:,ns szczlm Sciros, lierzllos." In another pa>:,i;;- he says: "Orr'oar~r,gc!lcre fiugus, ThorciLi~~~o~z~n~Scirorrtnz IJcrzrlorzr!~trlrbas ~?ll~l?it~{j. . . " In this c-zconcl case, it appears rhx Rog~: is not a tribal name, but a f;lmily n;irne, shomiilg dcsccnt from some real or mythic Rogus. The third passage might go to show t!nt il~cnarnc did ref:: to a tribe: "jrrb regis Tl~orcili:zgorz~rnRogoramqzre tqrurtiziik . . . " Were. however, the Sciri and tile Heruls are forgotten, as though they were seco!::iriry in iftscribiljg Odoacer's real status. Putting thse state~rirnisin at Ica:~oiic :ogic;il secltlence, it appoars that Ocloacer was t!le Tarci1in;:i-Icing, of the stock of I:u:us, xvith Sciri and I-Ierul f~llowers.'~ The evidcnce strongly hints that Odo~ccr'sliogia1-L connection did not tie him wit11 the tribe of Rtlgians, but tllac instead it lin!ied liiln with the family of some Rogus. '4mong the I-Iuns only clo vrsfind tliis ilalne, and n.!~en \vc Grid i:, it belor~~sto a man well worthy to give it to his line. Oat of t!ie tl~reebrothers ~lioruled the Huns before :ltti!a was Rog'ls or Rugi or Rugill3 (as the difl'crsnt sources, including Joriian~s,variously call him). Thi: othcr brothers were Octar or Oicar, and hlundiukh or Xlundzuch-the latter Xttila's f2r her. German tribcs and fafililies often spralig, or thouglit they spr.lng, froin some noted leader, but among the Turlcs and hfon,ao!s the same thing was truc. \Ye have the Ottoman Turks, the Seljuli Turks, the Chagatai hfongols, anii the Nogzi Tatars, to mention only a fe\r;.'" It is quite possible that Odoacer's 'l'orcilingi, or at lcast their royal clan, were thought of as derived fro111Xttila's unclr, Rogas the Hun-king.'" \I'hat was the nation of the leader of those 'Tcrcilingi, Sciri, and Rogians? "Genere Rogus," says Jordanes, and as we have seen, a Rogas was one of Attila's unclcs. Octar or Otcar are names given the other, and there is no paleographic reason to prefer either of those forms, unless further evidence should tip the balance. As a nntter of fact, such evidence is available. There is a fr~cgmentof a Greek chronicler, quoted by a later gramm1ri:in. which presents us with a Hunnic name more or lcss halfway between an Otczr and an Odoacer: "Odigar, the supremc ruler of the Huns, died." Tl;esc arc the only extant ~vorclsfrom that source. We have no nleitns to locate the ~~LIO.

24 Jor11alles, Rorrt., 44; Gei., 1.33, LVII. "Sotme of these epon\~nicIrciocs welt probably legendar): the evistcnce a Srljiik is cloub,eJ (ci. E. Illrsbi, "Turciii," Enc:.l. Ital., with b.bliogra~!ly). I3ut Oiiinian, Chagat!iai, and So,y.~iwcre histolical. ""'T11rs is si,,o tile opiniori of C!ocliet, lor. ci:. Jori!ancs, Get., 88, XXIII, it-:entions "Ru::Rs" beside the Finns, ;\es!ii, Sla\s, and 15:-uli, sub!u:ratctl hy the O~tw:,.ot5;s kin:,., E.:i-anaric, about 350 A.D. Sob~cl)112s bccn dl~!e.so f.ir, to expiain this passage; neither can we, unless it reflects soine tlaiii:ion that Roqas ant1 hi5 kin hari t;ct.~~$t),:ccrnc :ime io aiie1,t some sm,rtar: overlortlsliip by Errnarl~ijc.This woiild L't. ovr onlc, l-~,ir:i-iirrfclr SIIC!~ a kt. (If. <;ct., rc1-j. SXXV. Odoacer: German or HtttzP 45 ration as to time or place. \Vhetl;er the personage in question mas Attila's uncle, or still another I-Iun-liing, his narns certainly approaches that of Orl~acer.~Odoacer's own name evidently could not be pronounced by Ro~nan mouths ~vithoutsome liind of alteration.'' Like Torcilingi, Odoacczr is one of the names included in the onomastic dictionaries of the German tongues and likr the former, it appears with a question marl; i:~place of an etymology. Rut Turkish offers at last two prom- ising choices: If we regard this name as an ac-laptation of Ot-toglzar, it may mean either "gr;;ss-horn" or "fire-born." Anii a shorter ]lame, Ot-ghor, which i. closer to Otcnr, might be translateci by "her~i~r."'~If liatcllis could becuil>c Railag.iisus, ~r.l:]. cou1:d Ot-to;'!iar or 0:-ghar not !nvc bccoine Odoacer or 0:lovacer ?3u In atldition to Otcar slid 0:iig:lr anti O~ionccr,tlierr was still "another" of like name, n.ho hat1 a career as an unli!cliy free larice :?round 'ingers in the 450's and 460's.3P I11 our unique source for this leader, ~vrittena century af~erthe events l:y , we find tliis Adov:ccrius or 0:lovacrius heading a "Sn.;i>n" bL1n:l. PIC :c!lii liis n3c.i: too!; vr.: 11 cl~:?:~:icstr!~::c;l- fix cc!sn!rol of the rc~ion,bttv~cen the batik of Ch$lons (451) anc! the consolidation of 17islgothic:ii:ti~ority in the rcgio:~,1;y 1;cr.i~(;.66-48:). Since (;regor\ is tile cr;iy si-.l.o;iic~,~;.i;I;o int.i!tic;~:s [::is "Sasv!)" (') ic is north \vl:ilc to ul1nly7.e llis sror)-, i::;f<>rtu::at<:iyvc:v co!~f~i:i-t?."ilc(:<,rtlii:g . . !o T!::-hiqr~~ri:~,~~c~fc!l? >~[~~~~j)~ , . ir~ter\.enc~:iIn 1;;:~- .;::ilimre:r. I?:,;:!, 2:. li;;ot!is in :!i.c ciisrrict ~vit]: !!I;: !ie!p of the X:ranks, ncis kil!cti in a !it.$.\ ., - -, hTcnz111Ier I',,j*,,:(ch,IkIbinl i!t(:i~ t.!kei~ I,, iliilica'e tI1.i~ 11;i-y ?.r-crc tI1e;eby rna:liiestiii~surrender tu

Gc:ni21i ~II~~LICIX,~,??I? IJ?rn;!s1 Cli:;~!,.lr, crc;~v;~~dLii:~;: (,; lkJi.c,,:,ia i71 II~Y.1~1.1) hale l-rc~i sho\ving in his nai:~e thc \':.;i

3' iViiile in r:;c foll:~\i.ir:~aec!;i.n r7i oiir pa::" wc Liclc.itl!~the tiicsis that tl~e"Adosacrir~s" of t!ic Loire rcgi,,n iii t!ie qgo's crab r:lt rail~ras Itzly's Ciloacer, it sliould be noted that the major thesis of :!]is stii:!y--:hat he latter ws.; a ro)al !Ii;n-~lces r!o: tlei;c~!tl urion ?!his subsidiary point. 3'(;rcg. Turon., rlis!. I-l.nnr., 41.(;.H., SS. Rei.. .1Ierot,.,I, 83, 18, and 19. 33.f!~c 1 i?h~ase "c:irn Sccroilibiij" i> 1emir1isci.n: r;f the one Jvrcinnes ~:scd~vllcn tlescribi!ig, Oc!onicr's \ci;c~;rt. of : :~\:.cr: ''llli!.ei~ssrtiiijl S~~JLS. . ." I11 i?o:Il passaq~sthe au:i!o!s a17pcar to be intlicatiilg :hat :i.li~!e thc Ica~lcrwac of r,nc 11:e:cI. the ti-uo:!s vcrc. 11f anittllcr, sc a moc!ern historian w~)iilrliilii~lv if l!c wrote, "I.~i\srrnce, r.i~!i hic Saxons" had been killed in the battle with Paul's Romlns; then "their islands" (\vllose?) were captured by the . Finally, in his last sentence in this account, Gregory made an astonishing leap, certainiy through space and likely through time: "Odovacrius" (no longer "Adova- crius") came to an agreement of foedz~swith Childeric, concerning matters far off on the other side of . They jointly "subjugated those Alamans who had invaded part of Italy." Here Odovacrius is no longer connected nit11 a "Saxon" band. It seems \fell established that Gregory of Tours tool< this detailed informa- tion about Angers from a municipal compilation wllich has not come do~vilto us, the Anrialt~.4ngerini.34 His condensed and unclear account is apparently an extract or a direct copy of those lost Annales, except for the agreement of "0do1,acrius" in the last sentence. This combinaton of Childeric and "Ocio- vacrius" for joint business touching Italy hardly grows out of their squ3bbles at Angers. For his last fact Gregory could have drawn on the test or the es- tract of tlie text of some foedzis bet~veenChildcric and the Italian Odoacer, after the latter had risen to power. This last supposition jibes with other material we have on the basic foreign policy of the successor of ; this policy apparently aimed at securing the flanks of Italy by a chain of treaties with the barbarian rulers of Gaul and Africa, and at securing wherever possible direct control over 311 territories included in the Italian prefecture. \Ve linow that in tllic last con- nection, he reconquered from the murclerers of Julius Nepos, and that he destroyed the Rugian kingdom in . \\'hen he could not retain lands above the , lie aided their Roman inhabitants to withdrat17 into Italy proper. As to his western neighbors, we have long had evidence of treaties matie early in his reign with \'isigoths, , and \-andals. Gregory of Tours appears in this muddled passage to complete the chain by revealing a pact made aiound the same time (Childeric died about 480) by which the Franks of ChiMeric helped him restrain the Alamanni in the Rhaetian parts of the Italian I'refe~ture.~"No other source reveals evidence of Alamannic invasion of Italy proper, south of the Alp?, at this time.) Beyond the fact that Gregory apparently ]!ad reason to fuse "Adovacrius"

a4 Cf. Willlelm Junghans. Flistoire criiiq!re des 1.2~r:esde Childerir.h er de Chlodot,rch (Paris, 18j9), pp. I 2 tI.; C;odefroicl KUI-th,Eflidrs ~~UIZ~IICS(Paria-Hrusclles, 19191,11, 214 ff. 3%On the toreign policy of Otloncer? i.f. csl~eclallyFcrtlinantlo Gaborto. Stoird de!l' liiilin occi~ie:;tnle (Pinerolo, 191I), 1: Ludwig M H~rtnianii, G'escI2;chie 1ialie:rs zi12 I\f;iielnlier (Stutrgart-Gotha, l923), 1; Luigi Sal\.atorelli, L'lirrlin diille inid,io~iz bn~./,n;irheul ser-olo XI (Milano, 19;9), pp. jo ff.; G. B. Picotti, "Sulle relazioni fra re Odoncrc e il Scnntc) e In Chicsa c!i Roma," IZivzsta Storica ltulirrnu, scr. 5, IV, 363 ff., with bibliograj~hy. with "Odovacrius" and our deduction that the latter was Italy's OJoacer, there are general reasons for identifying "Adovacrius" of Angers with the same ruler. Just before the Angers incidents began, Sciri and, probably, "Torcilingi" 1la:i bcen in Gaul with Attilx; after the latter's withdrawal, northern and cen- tral Gaul were in confiision and there was no reason why petty leaders of all sorts should not try there to make their fortunes. If Sciri mere there under Odoacer, that explains ~irhyhe is not mentioned in connection with the war his father and brother wageti against the Ostrogoths; it also explains wily, about four years after his kinsmen had met crushing defeat in central Europe, lie had suficient follolr~ersto cause Ricimer to enlist him for Italian enter- prises. But Gregory calls Adovacrius' followers "Saxons," not S~iri.~'The fact that this is the unique reference to Sasons in the region, for a long time after, bears no weight; scraps of peoples strayed far in those days and it cannot be held that Sciri wandered but denied that Saxons could. Besides, the Saxons then were great pirates and the region was open to penetration from seas they roamed. I-Ion~everit can be pointed out that prilaeographically the confusion of Sciri and SLI.YOIZ~S,either by Gregory in reading his own source or by a copyist norliing on an early text of Gregory's history, is quite reasonable. The Saxons lasted on; long before the time of Gregory himself the Scirian name had dis- appeared. And Gregory was not a particularly erudite m31-1.~' Pretty good cases can be made out then, for theories that in the period of the migr;~tionstwo or at most three Odoacers flourisherl: Otcar, uncle of Attila the Hun; Odipr, "the supreme ruler of the Huns," who was probably the same man; aiid Odoacer, leader of Torcilingi and Sciri, ~vhotried first in Gaul and then succeeded in Italy. Of Edicon, Odoacer's father, we do not hear before the death of ,Attila; by that time, however, he would have been at least in middle age, for his son I-Iunoulphus slnred leadership with him (and, if the suggestions in the preced- ing section be accepted, his other son mas a leader at the same time in Only a few years before (448), \ire read of an Edica or Edicon who was a very high cificial uncler Xttila. The I-Iunnic ruler sent this man to Constanti- noplc as ambassador to Theodosius 11, along wit11 a noble Roman, Orestes, who probably ac~edas interpreter and liaison officer. , the Greek ~i410 telis of this legation, first calis this Edicon a "Scythian," which was the archa- istic name often used in that day for steppe nomadsof Southeastern Europe and "Wliile Scit-i were at ChBlons, these passages In Gregory are the only notice we have of Sauons in t!iuse pa:-ts wllcre till.; "Adio\~acriua" operated, for centurics bcforr and af~erGregory's d~y. ," "I Confusic1rls of the CI letter group with an A, and of I; with X, are far from impossible in the scri!lt of the tiine, while lI< could also be confused with IBUS. SS Odoacer was about s~xtyin 493 (cf. Nagl, lor. cit.). Central Asia.3QHowever, Priscus goes nn to re!atc that the emperor ~nvited Edicon to a ctate S3nqutt but did liot extend the in\,i:ation to Orestes. \\'hen the latter complained, courtiers to!d him t!xt he could not expect the same treatment as E(Iicon, "'1 Hun by race. excellent i;l fight." Now, though Priscus w:.oul:i have rr:c,lnt "Scythian" to be takcn as a litcrnry term, he v.ould not hzvc used "Hun" fgr anvonc not a Hun; in his day "I-Iun" rncnnt Hun (only later did it e.rte!id to mean peoples like ,l:lars and Xisgyars, when it became in its turn ;in archaistic term), and Priscus, of all Grceks in his clap, knew the I Tuns. .\ bit Idt~r.Orestes sctms to lia\c perwadi.:! his rinIjle 1Hu:l t~ plot the poisoning of Attila. Edicon, hone~er.m:tde no move to eKect that project; indeed, he revealed the plot to ,?t:lla, who forgave hirii. Orestes abandoned the i1unr;ic court. \Ye need scarcciy recall th.1~many ycars Idter, Orestes rnade h~sonn son Eniperor of the IYtst, through a new betrayal of his nclv lord, Jullus Nepos. Tlicn Odoacer, son of an Edlcon, put Orestes to death ,iii(t sent into retire~ilcnt the son of Oresces. Rom~llusrlugti~tulus. As for Edlcon, the "EIun Ly race" who waq so iligii in Attila's service. we do not hear of liim sfier herctcrn of his mission to . Eut niihin ,i fcn years ne find F,:l!con the "Scirlan," f.~t!!er of O(lo,tcer and I-Iu~loulpllas, lending a bittcr attack upon the O~tro~othqwho Iisci 5et1ayed their ,illeglarice to tlie heirs of 'Ittila. \Yhlle &ere :s no positive proof that the ~naEdicocq arc ider~tical,nothing seems morc probable. It is =ore or !rss talien for granted by all uho have touciied the prollcm. If qn, 0-loncer n.;is the son of a "Hun by race, excellrnt in fight ."'O The name Etiicon is not focnd among early Germanic pe:,ples; Germanic pli~lologists!1r?~c been unable io fi~dan etyn:ology for it. But theie was a 14ongollc EJgu arnong the cl~~ettalnsof the GolJen IIorde. 2s late as the thii- tccnth century.41 There is a "goocl" etymology in the Urai-Alt~~clinguisc~c group; ln fact, adg:c in Tur'iish, nwans "good."4' Odoacer'5 $on 1s cniled b; txo different namrc In oirr Source<: lhcl;n and

Pririu$, fra,ql;icnts y and 8; see cspccinliy pp. 76-83 and qj. -... 4C hp:iro~ing the ic1entifica:ion of tile Edicons are, anlong o!he:s, \Vietci-s1:cini-Dahn, rors:eniann. I-Irjil;kin. Iiury. Nagl. Only; A. Juris, "~ber'!as Rciili des Oc!o~akar," Gymnrrsir~riz Prograiir (lireuznach, 188;) is definirr!y a:;ainst [lie i(1entliication hecause of Priscus' statenlent !'Tat E.!ic,ln n.ns n Sc!thisn. I!e gi~esno ociier reamn. The French hktoriograp!:er of the seven- tecntli cenruly, I-lcr:ri t!e \'a!ois (\-slcsiur), reropnizccl Edicnn, wlio Kas a I-Iun (Priscus), as Odo~ac3r'sfarhrr; alluler, Die d?o1lgol?19 ir; II.,~:I (Leiprig. 1i)i9), pp. 39, 383, with sotlices. 42 t:!y;i:ology su~ges~e~lhy Ijloiher. Odoacer: German or Hun' 49 Oklan.oa This would seem to hint that one or the other was a title or a nick- name; neither has a satisfactory Germanic etymology. Tllelan resem!?les the name horne by the Ichagan of tllt: enstcrn Turks, Tulnn, who reigned iron 587 to 6co A.II. Olclan rescrnbles closely the Turkis!i-Tatar word oghlan, "youth," which iil modern times came through into German as rlhlan, the name for lancers of "tartar" t~,:pc.Tf this ctynlology be accepted, then the young man was named Tllelan and he n7ns also cr:lleti hmiliarly or even by title, "The Youth." T!ie namc: cf Otionccr's brcther, H~~noulphus,is formed of tn-o elerneilts whicl: ohen recur in tlle mmcs of early Gcrmlns: hzln and ivulf. The latter n.ord i~ self-tranqlating, hut the meaning of htrn has not beer] agreed upon by philologists. Eio;l-cvcr, tlie best and most generally accepted of a11 guesses so far olferec! is j ~1st"l

'3 On tlic spellings of Thelan-Olilan, cf. Schoenfcld, s. v. The best source, Joh. Antioch., fracrncnt 214a, spells 'Oz).&v. One is reminded of the words In/atzza and Iunker, grown into titles.

JJ Ernst Fijrstemann, A!ldeztrsches Rhr~zenhzich(2d ed., IJonn, 1900-16), I, s. 0. 45 r\cc~,.

A recapitul~tionof the e\ idence brings out these points: IYhile in a!l the secondary literature generally followed it has simply been ~csurxedthat Odoacer and his peoples mere Germans, there is no scrap of source nlaterial to support such an assun~ptionin the case of his immediate fol'ollowing and some evidence wilich goes far to indicate that they wcre not Germans. Next, while we have Jorclanes' testimony that Goths often took Hunnic names, it \vould seein strange for any Gothonic family to use them exclusively. Here, hon,ever, nc have leaders-Odoarcr, a17d his father and his son-who bear names no Germanic philology h'ls been ablc to explain but nllicll appear to make sense in some sort of Ural-Altaic speech. There is a brother with a "Germanic" name, but half of that is liz~~.~~ More than this, there are the coincidences (but a whole group of coinci- tlence5) :vhich link the names of this group to those of Attila's own kindrcd and to FIuiinic oificials nt At~ila'scourt. The careers of Odoaier, of his father. and of his brother-evcn of his ill- fated son-were entirely consistent with thore ivhich could have been achieved by nob!e Huns in the generation after Attila's death: "Torcilil;gorum rex,

'"01 baro, cf. Du Cange, Glossarit~mAled. et Inf. Lat., s. u.: RenP Grousset, L'empire der sfrppes (Paris, 1938),,p. 125; G. B. Picotti, "Unni," E~icicl.Ital., with bibliography. A hundred years later the sovereign of the Western T'u-kiiie (Turks) was named Isranii, yet the Greeks called him by his title, Sir-yabgl~rc,which they rendered as Sizabul. .Q I-Ie~hthaliteking defeated the Sassaninn ruler, Peroz, in 484; the Arabo-Persian wri~erstook the victor's title, k/zs/ietian, "king," to be his name, rendering it Akhshunwaz. 47 There is one exception, Odoacer's wife, whose name is given as Sunigilda by joh. Antioch. (fragment z~qa).But the wife was not necessarily of the same stock as the husband. The sagas, alt!iouqh they often mention the name of Odoacer under ciiferent transliterations, are unfor- tunately of little help, because of their unhistorical commingling of quite distinct personages and peoples; there are th~many ways in whicll P,etius the Roman and Attila the Hun were first conceivm! to be German hcl-ocs and then blendcd into one saga personality. The connection is at best tenuous, and is here pointed out with tlifldence, yet we may have a like curious echo of real hictorv in tl>r case nf O~loacrrand his family. For instance, an Ottarr is said by saga gen- c-n1ni.y to haye hcen the grandson of Alf and the great-grandson of Uli: a vague recall of some ll~~n-w~.~ll!111 13ec;\~:ulf, Ohchere (Odoncer?) is the son of Ongentheow ("servant of the Hunsw?- Edicon?), and t!~e brother of Onela (Hunoulph?). On the other hand, Onela is said by a tnodern philologist to he the same as Anala, mythic ancestor of the Ostrogothic royal dan. Odoacet: German or Hun? 5 1 habens serum Sciri, Hemlos . . . "; "a king of the Turks, having with him Sciri, Heruls . . . " If any should question why for just this one time the name Turk should appear in our sources for the period, it can be pointed out that here clearly Jordanes was drawing upon , \\rho delighted in showing off just that kind of knonledge, and ~vhowas in a position to possess it with respect to the family of Odoacer. Having deliberately chosen a "Hunnic" rather than the traditional "Ger- manic" point of view, then, here is ho~vone can reconstruct the main tfevelop- rnents in the "chunk of history" nhich was picked for the experiment: The Sciri (originally a B dtic ['I or Snrmatic [']-but hardly a Germanic-- people) mere dr~1n.ninto the Hunnic po1itic;l constellation around the middle of the fourth ce:ltury. 'TIicir ties to the macter 1-Iunr.i~people were drawn tighter and tighter in the rcigns of Cldin, Ro~~s,and ;ittil,?. Under the latter, one of his r~l~itivesof the royal clan of Rogas mas !eade~of the Sciii, supported by a banti of Torcilingi, his Turkish tribesmen. The plot of this leader, Edicon, lvith Orcstes, was forgiven; still, Attila left at home his once-tainted kinsman when marching against Aetius. the Roman \\:lo had the best ~onnections among the Iluns and nho might ha1 e trieli to tam;>er with some of the slla!ti- est v'lssnls of his adversary. Young Odo'lcer was with the Scirian contingent at Chillons; he remained in G'tul to profit from the disorder i~~hicllfollon~ed that battle. Then Attila died, and his sons and relatives dividrd-among tl~emselvcz the empire-or rather, the tribes-over nhich the fit~n-kinghad held sway. Ediccn retained control of that part of the Sciri which n7as not in Gaul nith O(1oacer; he carried on Xttil'l's drive to rule over the peoples but his forces proved inacie- quate. Only a handful of his Sciri surbived the defeat on the Rolia anti accom- panied Hunoulphus to Constantil~ople.Odoacer, squeezed out of Gaul be- tween the l7isi3othsacd the Franks, accepted service with Ri~irner.~'

In our e\s:i): we h:ive suggested :I !~:lsr!bc.rof Ural-.iltGlicetymologies for names mentioned ill the soL!ries for this el3oci1.ii rllcr!? lnc? not been accu!r.u-

"Two other thiygs may be mentioned, altliough they are not of great apparent significance. In his coins Odo:lcer IS rejirescnted tvith a thick mustache, which rnay be a Turkish as well as a German nilotnmcnt, and with heavy e)elitls, which seems to be ra~hera Tu11;iah than a German chnrac,etistic: Konian mone)ers oi the fifili century were usually shilled and rea:istic. Then, accor

Ince4 in the 11st Iiu?~.lieJyzrlrs :I grelt miss of Gx-ni~icetymologizing on all such names, we should have taken this step more lightheartedly, far two goo3 reasons : I. Whatever names may earlier predorninnte in a hu!nan group, when ii falls under the religious, political, moral, soci:il, or cultural leadership of some other group, the personal names or the naming principles of the latter will tend to be taken up by the former, though not, of course, to the exclusion of all older names. On several of these counts EIunnic doillinance of the Ger- manic world endured throughout the period of the migrations. One should therefore expect that "German" names, especially those in leading families \vhich had cause to mingle with the masters in campaigns, in court life, and in nuptials, should have been both adopted and aciapred from I-Iunnic names. Names of leaders, in turn, are just the sort our sources ha\.e preserved. 2. We do not have to rely upon deduction alone to conclude that in tlic epoch studied the process tool< place exactly in the manner stated. Jordanes writes, ". . . let no one who is ignorant cavil at the fact that the tribes of mcn inake use of many names, even as the Romans borrow from the hlacedonians. the Greeks from the Romans, the Sarmatinns from the Gcrmarls, andd~tGoths frequently fioaz the 11zrrz.i." (Jordanes, Al.G.II., Az~rt.Aztjq., Get., 70, IX; h4iero1v's trans.) To us it would seem that these two reasons are above chal!enge regarding this particuldr field of study. I-ion-ever, they arc rlct challenged-they arc simply ~assedover-in the whole mass of dictionaries and pl~ilologicalstuclies touching the subject. In tlleqe the approach is oi crviheltningly according to Ger~nanicpreconceptions. .All name elements, clear or doubtiul, are feti automatically into a complex apparatus of roots, analogies, hypothetical forms, similar terms linot~nto liave been later in use by some Germanic peop!; somenhcre, and the answer nearly always comes out at the other end: This ic ~vhatthe name meant-i11 German. The rest of the time, ur!len t!le machir, fails to work: '4 quesrion mark! \Ye feel that in cluestioning this .r\rholt: approach we are dolng Illore thni~ tilt at nin(imi!ls. Of course, the Germanic pretlil-ction of the history of i!i(. period as constructed in the nineteenth century gives great support to t!le.::. assum~~tionsof Germanic philology; the reverse is quite as trile. We nun.--,;.:., is apparent, deep reservations about at least some of the "history" but c-u face the ''{acts" of the philology and have no tools with which to dig into tl??i;l except those furnished by the philology itself. Still, we are bothered by it.

he rneant by this decision to inflict a last outragc ul;on the body of his encirry. if (jcioacrr was a heathen, burying him in a synagogue might seem the ~:lysoiu:i::n, for hi, i;oc'y \+iuld ha~eheen