Writing to Survive, Volume 1
A Commentary on Sidonius Apollinaris,
Letters Book 7. The Episcopal Letters 1-11
by Johannes A. van Waarden
LAHR 2, Leuven: Peeters, 2010
Review and catalogue
A key figure in late antique Gaul, Sidonius Apollinaris – aristocrat, administrator, poet, letter-writer, and bishop – is still insufficiently understood. This study aims to contribute to an up-to-date appreciation, both by incorporating recent research and by breaking new ground. It is a philological and historical commentary with many of the qualities of a monograph. Focusing on eleven letters written by Sidonius to his fellow bishops, one of which contains the only surviving example of Sidonius’ prose oratory, it fills an important gap in the critical coverage of his literary production. A lengthy introduction situates the letters within Sidonius’ life and works, the politics of the last years of the Roman empire in the west, and the traditions of late antique epistolography. Use is made throughout of modern research in linguistics, and a fresh hypothesis on the rendering of ‘you’ and ‘I’ in Sidonius’ correspondence is proposed. The book offers a reappraisal of late antique stylistic ‘mannerism’ as ‘community art’ which gives preference to the socially unifying function of art over its individual creative potential.
This is a work which will be of interest to classicists and medievalists, to literary scholars and church historians, to those concerned with philological and historical intricacies and those interested in the broader development of literature and mentalities in Late Antiquity.
Updates and corrections
These notes have been published in the second volume of Writing to Survive, as Addenda et corrigenda. Any further additions are marked below by an asterisk (*).
Book jacket, front flap
The illustration on the front cover is used by kind permission of Dr Henri Hours, former Keeper of the Archives of Puy-de-Dôme, who, together with his wife, documents the stained glass windows of the Cathedral of Clermont- Ferrand. The text on the front flap inadvertently ascribes the design of the window in which Sidonius figures to the artist Félix Gaudin. Dr Hours wrote to me: ‘Voici un cliché … du médaillon “représentant” Sidoine Apollinaire: on devine le sommet des lettres “SIDONIUS APOLLINARIS” au-dessus de la barlotière qui coupe le médaillon au quart supérieur. Il fait partie d’une verrière (située dans une chapelle latérale au sud de la nef) représentant, dans l’ordre chronologique des listes épiscopales traditionnelles, les évêques canonisés de Clermont des dix premiers siècles de l’ère chrétienne, exécutée en 1886 par le maître verrier Félix Gaudin sur des cartons de Louis Steinheil; le programme avait été défini par l’abbé Louis Antoine Chaix de Lavarène, nommé archiprêtre de la cathédrale en 1880, prêtre d’une solide érudition qui venait de publier un recueil des bulles pontificales des IXe –XIIe siècles relatives à l’Auvergne (Monumenta pontificia Arverniae […]), et à qui l’on devait déjà un Saint Sidoine Apollinaire et son temps (Clermont-Ferrand, F. Thibaud, 1866).’
Page 5, section 2.2
‘His father, anonymous, …’: Ralph W. Mathisen, ‘Epistolography, Literary Circles and Family Ties in Late Roman Gaul’, TAPhA 11 (1981) 95-109, on p. 100, has made a case for Sidonius’ father being called Alcimus. Cf. Patrizia Mascoli, Gli Apollinari (Bari, 2010) 18.
Page 7, note 11
Harries’ reconstruction of Sidonius’ consecration is challenged by Atsuko Gotoh, ‘The Consecration of Sidonius Apollinaris’, Studia Patristica 29 (1997) 40-45. Gotoh prefers to view this move as a positive choice by Sidonius himself to fulfil his sense of noblesse oblige.
Page 7, note 12
As pointed out by Peter Brown. Through the Eye of a Needle (Princeton, 2012) 491, Gregory, ‘an observer of the conflict-ridden churches of late sixth-century Gaul’, for all his respect for Sidonius’ nobility, could not help but ‘remember him as a pathetic figure’, because he had apparently failed to establish effective control of the wealth of his church
Page 9 with note 15
According to Alan Cameron, The Last Pagans of Rome (New York, 2011) 546-54, the translatio of the Vita Apollonii was a transcription in Greek, as were Nicomachus’ and Victorianus’ copies (and Flavian’s for that matter). On p. 554, he concludes that ‘there never was a Latin translation of the Life of Apollonius’. See also Charles W. Hedrick, History and Silence: Purge and Rehabilitation of Memory in Late Antiquity (Austin, TX, 2000) 179-81. François Paschoud, ‘On a Recent Book by Alan Cameron, The Last Pagans of Rome’, AnTard 20 (2012) 359-88 on pp. 367-69, takes a more nuanced position than does Cameron. See also Ivan Prchlík, ‘Sidonius or Flavianus: By Whom Was Philostratus’ “Vita Apollonii” Translated into Latin?’, Graecolatina Pragensia 22 (2007) 199-210, rejecting the notion of a translation by Sidonius.
Page 10 with note 16
* On the date of the Visigothic settlement in Aquitaine, see Ralph W. Mathisen, ‘The Settlement of the Goths in Aquitania: 418 or 419?’, in: Eugenio Amato et al. (eds), Canistrum ficis plenum. Hommages à Bertrand Lançon, RET Supplement 5 (2018) 277-82.
Pages 43, 380, 409
On the revival of the cult of St Martin by Perpetuus and its specific aims, see A.S. McKinley, ‘The First Two Centuries of Saint Martin of Tours’, Early Medieval Europe 14 (2006) 173-200, at pp. 185-90; cf. Peter Brown, Through the Eye of a Needle (Princeton, 2012) 420.
Pages 44-46 with note 92
On p. 44, last line, ‘clergy’ should be ‘bishops’.
On p. 45, in section ‘Subscriptio’, line 2, ‘clergy’ should be ‘bishops’; see Ralph W. Mathisen, ‘Dating the Letters of Sidonius’, in: J.A. van Waarden and G. Kelly (eds), New Approaches to Sidonius Apollinaris (Leuven, 2013) 221-48 on p. 240 n. 85.
On p. 46, n. 92, I supposed that the uniformity in Sidonius’ inscriptiones might be due to normalization at publication. Ralph W. Mathisen, Ruricius of Limoges and Friends. A Collection of Letters from Visigothic Gaul, translated with introduction, commentary and notes (Liverpool, 1999) 61, surmised ‘that there were in fact two different sets of salutation formulas that were used for different purposes: a very flowery form that was used in copies that were actually sent, and an abbreviated, more standardized, form that was used in file copies, and perhaps in rough drafts. Such a thesis could explain, for example, the high level of standardization, and even monotony, in the salutations of letters in the collection of Sidonius, especially if in this regard Sidonius was himself mimicking the published letters of his model Pliny.’ Mathisen now adds: ‘It is quite possible … on the one hand that farewell salutations that were not preserved in the archived copies of Sidonius’ letters were added in a concise standardised form when he edited the letters, and on the other hand that any salutations that were preserved were replaced by the brief standardised forms’ (in New Approaches to Sidonius Apollinaris, p. 241).
Line 12 from bottom: instead of ‘wording’ read ‘thought’. The connection made in this paragraph with the categories ‘word/complexity’ and ‘pattern/regularity’ is misleading. See now Volume 2 ad Ep. 7.18.2 sensuum structurarumque.
To the bibliography on prose rhythm add Giovanni Orlandini, ‘Metrical and Rhythmical Clausulae in Medieval Latin Prose: Some Aspects and Problems’, in: Tobias Reinhardt et al. (eds), Aspects of the Language of Latin Prose, Proceedings of the British Academy 129 (Oxford, 2005) 395-412.
Fifth paragraph: delete ‘Sidonius’ wife was born in Vienne, and’.
* For the importance of the Rogationes in the Middle Ages, see Nathan J. Rituccia, Christianization and Commonwealth in Early Medieval Europe: A Ritual Interpretation, Oxford, 2018, who studies them as ‘a rich case study for understanding how mandatory rituals molded European communities’ (p. 3). They got a chapter of their own in Jacopo de Voragine’s Legenda aurea (ch. 70 Graesse).
Lemma coepit initiari: Hannah Rosén, ‘The Late Latin coepi + Infinitive Construction: Evidence form Translated Texts’, Classica et Mediaevalia 63 (2012) 189-215, is an attempt to disprove the communis opinio that coepi + inf. is ingressive throughout.
* Lemma etsi non effectu pari, affectu certe non impari: This could well be a variation on Auson. Biss. praef. pari iure, sed fiducia dispari.
Lemma caelitus: add Ep. 1.2.2 stirpitus to adverbs on -(i)tus.
On pp. 104-105 ad 7.1.4 and on 107-108 ad ignis recussus in tergum … sinuaretur, the motif of flames retreating before a just man is older and more general than I suggested; see Stefania Santelia, La miranda fabula dei pii fratres in Aetna 603-645 (Bari, 2012) 71-72 ad Aetna 634-35 erubuere pios iuvenes attingere flammae / et quacumque ferunt illi vestigia cedunt. She mentions the three men in the fiery furnace (Dan. 3.8-28) and Aeneas, and cites Verg. A. 2.632-33 ducente deo flammam inter et hostis / expedior; dant tela locum flammaeque recedunt, and Claud. Carm. min. 17.3-4 iusta quibus rapidae cessit reverentia flammae / et mirata vagas reppulit Aetna faces. On pp. 108-109, the phrase affuit flammae cedere per reverentiam should have been placed in this intertextual relationship; per reverentiam stems form Claudian and is equivalent to erubuere in the Aetna poem. Bishop Mamertus is a second Aeneas, as were Martin of Tours and Pope Leo. Jerome applied the motif to Aaron as champion of his people in the face of God’s wrath in Ep. 128.5 legimus Aaron pontificem isse obviam furentibus flammis … stetit inter mortem et vitam sacerdos maximus, nec ultra vestigia eius ignis procedere ausus est. The parallel I suggested with Camilla, Verg. A. 11.653-54, is only distantly related.
Lemma nostri ordinis viris: Contrary to what is stated here, Sidonius does use ordo as a technical term for the town council, at Ep. 7.14.1 erat et frequens ordo.
* Jean Berger, ‘Droit, société et parenté en Auvergne médiévale (VIe-XIVe siècles): Les écritures de la basilique Saint-Julien de Brioude’, PhD thesis Lyon III, 2016 (inedit.), vol. 1, ch. 2 ‘L’église brivadoise et la chose publique: Une “longue Antiquité tardive”’, esp. pp. 29-37, interprets section 7 as a politely veiled, essentially harsh criticism of Mamertus’ action. He argues that Mamertus’ inventio is a blatant offence against Roman funerary law and nothing less than a malicious furtum sacrum, inspired by the earliest legends of St Julien. Sidonius appositely deploys a judicial vocabulary: iniurium, compensatio, deposcere. The reference to the revolutionary precedent of Ambrosius’ translatio would stress the shocking character of what Mamertus has done, rather than justifying it. (Berger sees another reproach of Mamertus by Sidonius at Ep. 5.14.3, where, according to him, Sidonius puts Mamertus on a par with ‘intouchables’ for instituting the Viennese Rogationes at the expense of Sidonius’ Auvergne.)
* Add subsequent reception of this passage in Greg. Tur. Iul. 2 praebet tamen huic operi testimonium Sollius noster, ipsi Mamerto scribens his verbis: ‘Tibi soli concessa est in partes orbis occidui martyris Ferreoli solida translatio, adiecto nostri capite Iuliani. unde pro conpensatione deposcimus ut nobis inde veniat pars patrocinii quia nobis hinc rediit pars patroni’, and Ven. Fort. Ep. (Carm.) 5.1.10 est enim ratio consequens ut per vos illinc nobis redeat spes patrocinii quia ad vos hinc prodiit pars patroni. See Luciana Furbetta, ‘Gioco letterario e realtà: l’esempio dell’epistolario di Sidonio Apollinare’, 2016, 45-46.
Lemma vel confessorem Ambrosium, second paragraph, ‘In Sidonius’ correspondence etc.’: add ‘In his poetry, confessor again refers to Martin in Carm. 31.4 (Ep. 4.18.5) and to the monk Abraham in Carm. 33.9 (Ep. 7.17.2), who thus belongs to a select company.’
Differently from Arles which endured five sieges between 425 and 472, Marseille seems to have emerged unscathed, and even taken over the dominant position of Arles’ harbour Fos thanks to its natural deep-sea port and a sufficient volume of long-distance trade. By the late sixth century it played a crucial role in the Merovingian economy. See Simon T. Loseby, ‘Marseille: A Late Antique Success Story?’, JRS 82 (1992) 165-85, and cf. Peter Brown, Through the Eye of a Needle (Princeton, 2012) 412. Loseby mentions Amantius on p. 181 (with n. 124): ‘It is nevertheless [despite our uncertainty as to the extent of Arles’ decline] interesting to see that in the 470s a would-be entrepreneur from the Auvergne was preferring to seek his commercial fortune at Marseille rather than at Arles’.
Lemma scilicet ut lector: for scilicet one can now refer to Josine Schrickx, Lateinische Modalpartikeln: nempe, quippe, scilicet, videlicet and nimirum (Leiden, 2011). In section 16.3, she provides a summary of scilicet, videlicet and nimirum as ‘commitment’ markers: when using scilicet, the speaker considers the enunciation as self-evident and implies that the addressee too will take it for granted; videlicet is used in a more neutral context: it indicates that, for the speaker at least, something is clear by inference (no claim on the addressee); nimirum expresses a high degree of commitment from the speaker (idem). Scilicet and videlicet also differ in scope (sect. 15.7), scilicet having a narrower scope (often in parentheses) aimed at creating a common basis for the rest of the enunciation, while the scope of videlicet is usually the entire enunciation. See also Ep. 7.8.1 videlicet. Scilicet occurs 20 times in Sidonius’ correspondence, videlicet 11, nimirum 9. See below at pages 384-85.
Lemma obsequiis … officiis, line 9: 1.9.1 should be 5.3.1 (see below Index locorum).
On episcopal elections, see now Johan Leemans et al. (eds), Episcopal Elections in Late Antiquity, Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 119 (Berlin, 2011). In the same volume, see also Johannes A. van Waarden, ‘Episcopal Self- Presentation: Sidonius Apollinaris and the Episcopal Election in Bourges AD 470’, on pp. 555-61.
Line 1: ‘Position’ should have been a separate section on a par with 1 Overview, 2 Addressee, etc.
Salvatore Pricoco, Eucherio, Elogio dell’eremo, Bologna, 2014, p. 102 n. 158, considers the words ecclesiasticas caulas istius aetatis lupus … arrodat to be a borrowing from Eucherius Laus 38.1 fremit frustra tunc circuiens adversarius tamquam intra caulas … lupus, and thus as a proof of Sidonius’ familiarity with Eucherius’ work. Cf. also ibid. pp. 78-79.
Lemma non videre quo redeat, etc.: compare also the specific use of videre, ‘to have before oneself’, ‘have at one’s disposal’, in Sen. Prov. 4.5 unde scio quam aequo animo laturus sis orbitatem, si quoscumque sustulisti vides?, ‘how can I know how calmly you would endure to be childless, if you see all of those you have recognised around you?’
This suggestion of the hypotext Sil. 11.173-90 and the reference to Capua and to Decius have now been fully developed in the programmatic context of Sidonius’ creation of identity from the past by Sigrid Mratschek in ‘Creating Identity from the Past. The Construction of History in the Letters of Sidonius’ in New Approaches to Sidonius Apollinaris, pp. 249-71.
* Lemma praesumpsit: Sara Fascione, ‘Seronato, Catilina e la moritura libertas della Gallia’, Koinonia 40 (2016) 453-62, at 461 n. 51, would see this verb as continuing the image of drinking introduced by the term propinantem.
A similar instance of concolor and a sallow colour is found in Prud. Cath. 3.153-55 tractibus anguis [the snake in paradise] inexplicitis / virus inerme piger revomit / gramine concolor in viridi.
Annick Stoehr-Monjou has made a case for a Horatian reminiscence in statum concordiae tam turpis incidite which would further reinforce the indignation: Hor. Ep. 1.14.36 non lusisse pudet, sed non incidere ludum (in ‘Sidonius and Horace. The Art of Memory’ in New Approaches to Sidonius Apollinaris, pp. 133-69 on p. 159).
Lemma de minimis videlicet rebus, etc.: videlicet implies that the statement is evident to the author, but that he does not presume consensus with the addressee. Add a cross-reference to 7.2.1 scilicet ut lector, and to the new text outlined above at page 144.
Second paragraph: at the end, add ‘See Engelbrecht 1886: 465’.
* Lemmata … rhetorica partitio, … oratoriae m[ach]inae, …. grammaticales figurae. … pondera historica …. poetica schemata. See Marco Onorato, Il castone e la gemma. Sulla tecnica poetica di Sidonio Apollinare, Naples, 2016: 258-60, with similar definitions as mine. His unnecessary acceptance of Mohr’s conjecture machinae, however, does not take my argument into account. On pondera historica, see Ulrich Eigler, Lectiones vetustatis. Römische Literatur und Geschichte in der Literatur der Spätantike, Zetemata 115, Munich 2003: 146-50; the book is a study of the shifting meaning and place of the Roman past in the consciousness of elite Latin readers in Late Antiquity.
Fourth paragraph: instead of Ep. 7.14.2 read Ep. 7.18.2.
Add the analysis of the address for its ideological and cultural background in Franca Ela Consolino, Ascesi e mondanità nella Gallia tardoantica. Studi sulla figura del vescovo nei secoli IV-VI (Naples, 1979) 91-97.
Lemma … professionis huiusce pondus ... : Add a cross-reference to (possibly a reminiscence of) Cassian. Inst. 4.33 pondus professionis huius, where it is the responsibility of being a monk.
* Lemma multum … honoris, plus oneris: To the instances of this proverb in Otto 1890 and Nachträge Otto 1968, add Auson. Protr. 98-99 accessit tamen ex nobis honor inclitus; hunc tu / effice ne sit onus.
Lemma pellitos reges … principes purpuratos: Audrey Becker, ‘Les évêques et la diplomatie romano-barbare en Gaule au Ve siècle’, in: Michèle Gaillard (ed.), L’empreinte chrétienne en Gaule du IVe au IXe siècle (Turnhout 2014) 45-59, doubts the ‘natural’ disposition of aristocratic bishops (Mathisen), and indeed their being employed by the emperors, for diplomatic embassies. She sees the involvement of the bishops in the negotiations with Euric (Letters 7.6 and 7.7) as being limited to lobbying for their local and regional interests.
In the lemma quibus comparatus pater, etc., the formulation of the motif of a father’s happiness at seeing himself surpassed by his son – basically proverbial in itself – might well be inspired by Ov. Met. 15.850-51 natique videns bene facta fatetur / esse suis maiora, et vinci gaudet ab illo, speaking of Caesar and Octavian.
Lemma a quo contigit saepius vos videri: The construction is not as unusual as suggested; there is also Ep. 7.14.12 si vos a me videri Christi munere datur, ‘if by Christ’s grace I am allowed to meet you’.
Last paragraph: After ‘… in the action.’, insert ‘The one exception, 2 in vobis, avoids making the addressee responsible in the unlikely case that he is not able to comply with the sender’s request.’ See also Appendix I below.
Lemma cui, precor, ...: The reference to 3.5.1 should be to 3.12.5.
Appendix E: Modes of Address
In the table in section 1, the frequency of antistes should be 8 (in Books 1-9) and 2 (in Book 7 alone). The instances in which antistes means ‘priest’ had been erroneously added to the total.
Appendix F: Sequences
On p. 571, add to column ADJ 3: 1.7.6 perfidum barbarum ignavum.
On p. 572, 5.17.2 should be 5.17.1
On p. 573, add to column NOUN 3: 7.12.1 tempus ordinem statum and 7.13.2 intentio celeritas mora.
The extensive monograph by Jeffrey Wills, Repetition in Latin Poetry. Figures of Allusion (Oxford, 2006), has scarcely anything to say about Sidonius. Asyndetic sequences of three or more members are especially conspicuous in Quintilian, according to D.A. Russell, ‘Omisso speciosiore stili genere’, in: Tobias Reinhardt et al. (eds), Aspects of the Language of Latin Prose, Proceedings of the British Academy 129 (Oxford, 2005) 257-71 on pp. 268-71.
Appendix I: ‘You’ and ‘I’
On page 589, letter 11, right hand column, add ‘pe – ‘you’ not responsible: ad (2 vobis)’. See above at page 550.
Add: Laura Giuffrida, ‘Un’elezione vescovile nel V secolo. Note su una testimonianza di Sidonio Apollinare’, Studi tardoantichi 6 (1989) 143-51.
Index of Latin words
On p. 623, sermo: add ‘152-53’.
On p. 647, delete ‘165’ as an instance of Ep. 1.9.1; the correct cross-reference is to Ep. 5.3.1 (to be inserted on p. 650).
On p. 648, delete ‘560’ as an instance of Ep. 3.5.1; this should be of Ep. 3.12.5, to be added on p. 649.
On p. 652, change 7.14.2 into 7.18.2.
Writing to Survive, Volume 2
A Commentary on Sidonius Apollinaris,
Letters Book 7. The Ascetic Letters 12-18
by Johannes A. van Waarden
LAHR 14, Leuven: Peeters, 2016
See the publisher’s catalogue.
Asceticism, and the antidote it offers to contemporary secular disappointments in fifth-century Gaul, is the central theme in the second part of Book 7 of Sidonius Apollinaris’ correspondence. Addressing a state of ferment in which the closely-knit Gallo-Roman elite is shifting its moral and religious parameters along with its political certainties, these letters only reveal their full significance – this commentary claims – when read as ascetic documents mirroring the mentality of the monks of Lérins.
This second volume of Writing to Survive follows the first (LAHR 2) in scope and method, providing detailed philological underpinning as well as a wealth of thematic research. Together, these two volumes constitute an important contribution towards the comprehensive range of commentaries on Sidonius’ work planned by the ‘Sidonius Apollinaris for the Twenty-First Century’ project for publication in the LAHR series.
Like its companion volume, this work will be of interest to classicists and medievalists, to literary scholars and church historians, to those concerned with philological and historical intricacies and those interested in the broader development of literature and mentalities in Late Antiquity.
Updates and corrections
Footnote 10: Add Mathisen 1981 to literature.
Concerning abbati vs suo, Vat. Lat. 3421 (ms. A) has suo in the rubricated heading, corrected above to abbati in the hand of the main scribe.
Line 16 from bottom: ‘p. 210’ should be ‘p. 610’.
Pages 55 and 62-64
For Syagrius, the addressee of Letters 5.5 and 8.8 (PLRE 2, Syagrius 3), see Angela Frauenhuber, ‘Kontinuität und Wandel. Karrieren und Lebensbilder im Gallien des 5. Jahrhunderts. Betrachtungen zu zwei Briefen des Sidonius Apollinaris an Syagrius’, Diomedes 4 (2007) 11-21.
Lemma suae … auctorem: ‘Suae = eius’ is incorrect: suae is reflexive.
Line 8 from bottom: voluptuosius.
Lemma barbaros vitas …: Cf. 5.13.4 in summa, de Seronato vis accipere quid sentiam? ceteri affligi per suprascriptum damno verentur, mihi latronis et beneficia suspecta sunt.
On gifts of clothing, see Nikki K. Rollason, Gifts of Clothing in Late Antique Literature, Abingdon: Routledge, 2016, esp. 129-69 for holy garments.
As to Volusianus’ estates in Bayeux, add VVigoris 5, AASS Nov. 1, 300 praedia Baiocassina.
On Abraham’s epitaph and the representation of afterlife, see also Jutta Dresken-Weiland, ‘Vorstellungen von Tod und Jenseits in den frühchristlichen Grabinschriften der Oikumene’, AnTard 15 (2007) 285-302, esp. 292.
Lemma lanigero de sue, add to bibliography: Paul Vallette, ‘Isidore de Séville et la fondation de Milan’, Mélanges d’histoire et de littérature offerts à Ch. Gilliard à l’occasion de son soixante-cinquième anniversaire, Lausanne: Rouge, 1944, 93-102. (Le porc lanigère que soit Claudien, Épithalame d’Honorius et de Marie (fille de Stilichon) 183-185, soit Sidoine Apollinaire, Epist. VII,17,2,19, associent à la légende des origines de Milan semble de date relativement récente. Chez Isidore, Etym. XV,1,57, il sert à expliquer l’élément -lanum dans le nom de Mediolanum. Or la brève notice qu’Isidore consacre à la fondation de la ville contient plusieurs vers. On est donc fondé à admettre l’existence, entre le milieu du IVe siècle et l’époque où furent composées les Étymologies, d’un écrit anonyme, en vers décadents, sorte de catalogue ou de mémento étymologique des villes illustres. Cet opuscule a dû servir de source à Isidore, à titre subsidiaire. – Source APh)
Lemma statuta Lirinensium patrum vel Grinincensium: The identification of Grinincensis with Grigny has sometimes been rejected; it was supposed instead to refer to the district of Vienne on the opposing bank of the Rhône where St Ferreolus’ church stood. The identification with Grigny is reestablished, however, by Laurent Ripart, ‘De Lérins à Agaune: Le monachisme rhodanien reconsidéré’, in: Monachesimi d’oriente e d’occidente nell’Alto Medioevo, Spoleto: CISAM, 2017, 123-92, esp. 154-57.
Lemma scripturire: This verb was picked up by William of Malmsbury (GR 2 prol. ipse quoque scripturire incepi) and John of Salisbury (Ep. 226 scripturientis affectionem cohibere … non possunt). See the Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources (DMLBS) s.v.
Add: Matheus C. Figuinha, ‘Monges sob o manto de generais: aristocracia imperial galo-romana e monasticismo nas obras de Sidônio Apolinário’, Classica 28 (2015) 47-64.