Talk:Northern Swabians

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Obviously no need for me to review as you have auto-rights, but this is a fascinating article! Enjoyed reading very much. :)

Aesurias (talk) 03:22, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Suevi replacing Saxons in Gregory of Tours

Srnec thanks for making this article. I guess this will deserve expansion and more new sources eventually, and right now the Wikipedia access to Gruyter is down (although I at least have Springer's Saxons book), but as a quick remark about this:

• "Gregory's story of Suevi settling in territory abandoned by Saxons at the time the Lombards began their migration is repeated in the late 8th century by Paul the Deacon in his History of the Lombards and in the mid-10th century by Widukind of Corvey in The Deeds of the Saxons." The reference to a Lombard "migration" makes me think of their migration from the Lower Elbe to the Danube. But I think you are referring to their invasion of Italy? Maybe this should be worded a bit differently.
• FYI this topic in Gregory is also mentioned in our Saxons article which I've worked on. See Saxons#Merovingian period. You'll see I've been more influenced by Springer, and that article might might also need adjustment, but I had the impression that this is not a topic with only two positions. I felt so far that it was easier to make clear on Wikipedia that the location of these events is unclear. I didn't get the impression that there is still a strong consensus. (One of your sources is 19th century.)

Andrew Lancaster (talk) 04:56, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Good point re: Lombards. I have changed the text.

Are you disputing "usually identified"? What does Springer say about Paul and Widukind? Srnec (talk) 02:25, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Not disputing, just giving a note about where else to look, because I have the feeling there are more opinions than two but I've never really gotten to the bottom of it. (These sections in the Suebi article have been left a bit open-ended also.) I didn't have time to look much yesterday, but at least concerning older scholarship Springer p.102 confirms Seit etwa einem Jahrhundert nimmt die Mehrzahl der Forscher an, dass Sigibert I. de Saxones, die aus Italien nach Gallien gekommen waren, Sitze am Fluss Bode in Mitteldeutschland angewiesen hätte, dass die Heimat dieser Krieger also im alten Sachsen zu suchen wäre. Demnach wären sie Sachsen gewesen. According to him the reasoning is based upon another passage in Gregory which he cites as 5.15. He says that immediately after writing about the Champagne region, Gregory starts talking about how Chlothar and Sigibert settled Suavi and other people in "diese Gegend". According to him, the simplest interpretation is that they were therefore settled in the Champagne region, and not Germany, but that's not Springer's proposal either. (He thinks this happened in or near Normandy, and even proposes that the Suevi might have come from Iberia, and the Saxons from England.) p.109 he points out that the Bode is north of the Unstrut and even the Harz mountains, and he finds it problematic that modern scholars could propose that Sigibert was able to give lands there when they were since 531 under Saxon control, and he is confident that this is not the region Gregory was talking about. Concerning Paul the Deacon he claims there is general agreement (p.107) that his words are derived from Gregory. He says Paul give no reason to link these events to the Bode, but rather modern scholarship makes a direct connection between Gregory's words and placenames known from the 10th and 11th century (p.108). He notes that in 934 "in pago Suevia" appears in an Urkunde of Henry I, and later documents mention "in pago Suevon/Svabun". Some researchers have said that this pagus was bounded by the rivers Schlene, Saale, Bode and Harzwipper, but Springer reminds readers about what he has written about early medieval boundaries. Springer notes that "Nordschwabengau" is never mentioned. These terms come from the letter of Theudebert. p.109: "In welcher Weise der SChwaben - oder Suebengau zu seiner Bezeichnung gekommen ist, lässt zich nicht feststellen." Although he cites Widukind many times in this book I don't see him citing him about this topic. Concerning Widukind a first quick look seems to indicate that his text might also have said Transalbini which would fit well with the river Elbe, but in any case he seems to just be reciting Paul, apart from this additional name. I imagine that there will be some discussions around about this and also about what Theudebert was referring to. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:25, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

There is a discussion of Widukind's Transbadani here and here. Srnec (talk) 20:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I wish we had access to that book also. Here is another source which may be interesting to you: Reynolds, Robert (1957), "Reconsideration of the history of the Suevi", Revue Belge de Philologie et d'Histoire, 35: 19–45 . Although the main thesis seems to have convinced no one, the article as a whole contains a lot of useful remarks. Theudebert is on page 44, and Gregory's story on page 45.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:27, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

I notice that in that book, in the article of Springer, he also comments on the Theudebert letter. His focus is on the Saxons of course, so he does not mention the Suebi there.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Srnec: Gruyter seems to be working again via WP.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

The Sigibert I article in RGA by Springer as quite a good digression on this topic, including

• Gregory’s remarks—especially his data on the march-route of the Saxones—hardly allow any conclusion other than that the homeland of these people is to be sought in Gaul (22, 897), and not in Germania. If the relevant localities were not in Champagne (where, strictly speaking, they should have been according to Gregory), the supposition suggests itself that it was an area on the Atlantic coast similar to the region of Bayeux.
• Paul the Deacon is in turn the immediate source for Widukind of Corvey (✝ after 973), who explicitly invokes the History of the Lombards. He does, however, say that the Suavi Transbadani “invaded” (invaserunt) the territory they inhabited when Saxons entered Italy with the Lombards (9, 24). Widukind thus knows nothing of “Swabians beyond the Bode” having been settled by Sigibert. Still less has he heard that Saxons returned from Italy to central Germany.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Both that article and the Sweben article by Castritius perhaps give us another primary source we should mention. To be clear I am just quickly using ChatGPT for the translations here:

• Northern German—or, more precisely, north-central European—bearers of the Suebian name are repeatedly attested: Venantius Fortunatus names Suebis (abl.) in one breath with Frisians (7, 203, v. 75).
• Thus the Suebi are mentioned in the same breath as the Frisians (Venantius Fortunatus, Carmina IX, 1, v. 75)--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:23, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

It took me a while to piece together Gregory's account to see why Springer concludes what he does. O. M. Dalton in his translation of Gregory certainly assumes the Saxons in question came from and returned to Germany despite their passage through Gaul. What Gregory says at V.15 is that Lothar and Sigibert had settled Suevi and other peoples in the place which [Alboin] left void. The Saxons who returned in the time of Sigibert, those, namely, who had been with Alboin, rose up against the new settlers... Earlier, at IV.42, he writes that the Saxons, who had entered Italy with the Lombards, once more burst into Gaul, which Dalton takes to refer to the invasion of 472. After much toing and froing, the Saxons went on to King Sigibert and were established in the place from which they had originally set forth. Just before this, they were in Auvergne. Springer may be right, but I am not sure why he is so confident.

I'm also unsure how can Widukind know nothing of Swabians beyond the Bode having been settled by Sigebert. He does not mention it, but if Paul was his source he surely knows it! According to Paul (quoting William Dudley Foulke's translation), Chlothar and Sigisbert, kings of the Franks, put the Suavi and other nations into the places from which these Saxons had come. These Saxons are Alboin's old friends but Paul does not say where they came from. Widukind may not have believed the story of the Franks settling the Suevi south of the Bode but he clearly believed that story refers to the Suevi south of the Bode. At least, Springer admits in the Ethnographic Perspective volume that this is the communis opinio, although he thinks transbadani might originally have been transpadani (across the Po) and that there are layers of confusion in Widukind's account.

What does all this mean for this article? I think Widukind is the lynchpin: his account in the form we have it pertains to the inhabitants of the Schwabengau (scholarly consensus). He thus connects them to the story in Paul, which is basically the one originally found in Gregory. We could perhaps order our coverage in reverse, to highlight the more tenuous connection between Gregory's Suavi and the Schwabengau. Srnec (talk) 16:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

Well I don't think it is easy to feel confident that the common opinion is still as strong as it was. Springer's doubts are clearly taken seriously and being mentioned in various sources on this topic. I think we should register in the body text that there are such doubts. In such a situation it would make sense to me to quote Widukind and let readers get a feeling for it? Concerning Widukind's lack of knowledge of "settlement", he uses the word "invaserunt". Paul could be his source, but he is still not accurately repeating the same details.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 23:16, 1 November 2025 (UTC)