¹ For the poet's background, career, and literary output see Roberts, Michael, The Humblest Sparrow: The Poetry of Venantius Fortunatus (Ann Arbor, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; George, Judith, Venantius Fortunatus: A Latin Poet in Merovingian Gaul (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar; Brennan, Brian, “The Career of Venantius Fortunatus,” Traditio 41 (1985): 50–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

² All references to the poetry of Venantius Fortunatus are to the book, poem number, and lines in the edition of Friedrich Leo, MGH Auctores antiquissimi 4.1. Fortunatus's metrical Vita Sancti Martini henceforth cited as VSM. References to the Libri historiarum of Gregory of Tours are to the edition of B. Krusch and W. Levison, MGH Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum, hereafter SRM, 1.1, and the history cited hereafter as LH. References to Gregory's miracula are to the edition by B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1.2, and are cited hereafter as follows: De gloria confessorum = GC; Liber in gloria martyrum = GM; Liber vitae patrum = LP; Libri de virtutibus sancti Martini = VM. References to the two lives of Radegund are to the edition by B.Krusch, MGH SRM 2, cited hereafter as follows: Fortunatus, Vita Radegundis = Fortunatus, VR; Baudonivia, Vita Radedundis = Baudonivia, VR. All translations of the poetry of Venantius Fortunatus are mine.

³ Levitan, William, “Dancing at the End of the Rope: Optatian Porfyry and the Field of Roman Verse,” Transactions of the American Philological Association 115 (1985): 245–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Polara, Giovanni, “Le parole nella pagina: Grafica e contenuti nei carmi figurati latini,” Vetera Christianorum 28 (1991): 291–336Google Scholar. See Polara's edition of Optatian (Turin, 1973).

⁴ Wagner, Peter, ed., Icons–Texts–Iconotexts: Essays on Ekphrasis and Intermediality (Berlin, 1996), 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵ See Margaret Graver, “Quaelibet Audendi: Fortunatus and the Acrostic,” Transactions of the American Philological Society 123 (1993): 219–45: Giuseppe Pipitone, “Tra Optaziano Porfirio e Venanzio Fortunato: Nota intorno alla lettera a Siagrio,” Revue des études tardo-antiques 1 (2011): 119–27.

⁶ A great deal of the richness of this long and complex tradition is explored in Spinning Fates and the Song of the Loom: The Use of Textiles, Clothing and Cloth Production as Metaphor, Symbol and Narrative Device in Greek and Latin Literature, ed. Giovanni Fanfani, Mary Harlow, and Marie-Louise Nosch (Oxford, 2016).

⁷ Some few examples only of the common figurative usage: Ov. Met.1.4; Tr.1.1.39; Hor. Epist. 2.1.225; Cic. Cael.18.

⁸ Max Manitius, in his appendix to Leo's edition, lists Fortunatus's reminiscences of Ovid's Metamorphoses in both his poems and metrical Vita Martini: 2.7.38 Ov. Met. 15. 532; 2.9.59 Ov. Met. 15. 458; 3.7.47 Ov. Met. 14.752; 3.10.23 Ov. Met.3. 110; 6.10.44 Ov. Met.13.123; 7.1.1 Ov. Met. 10. 145; 8. 3.201 Ov. Met. 1.167; 9.7.53 Ov. Met. 4.616; 10.9.35 Ov. Met. 4.777; VSM 3. 124 Ov. Met. 2. 205; VSM 4. 231 Ov. Met. 10. 608; VSM 4. 499 Ov. Met. 6.145; VSM 4. 605 Ov. Met. 9.175. See also Sven Blomgren, “De locis Ovidii a Venantio Fortunato expressis,” Eranos 79 (1981): 82–85.

⁹ Hor. Ars P. 361.

¹⁰ Claud. Prob. 177–84; IV Cons. Hon. 585–95; VI Cons. Hon. 560–64; II Cons. Stil. 88–94; 339–61.

¹¹ The printed text established by Leo has the third-person singular imperfect active subjunctive curreret in line 627, but in the apparatus he raises the possibility of currere et. The most recent editor of the text, Solange Quesnel, Venance Fortunat, Œuvres, Tome IV, La Vie de Saint Martin (Paris, 2002), 168 note 78, suggests that Leo may have been drawn to this solution because of Fortunatus's use of infinitives nearby in the text: duci line 625, necti line 626, and pingere line 628. I propose instead the third-person singular perfect active indicative cucurrit and suggest that Fortunatus, here in his description of Martin's cloak, may have been influenced by the description of the prize cloak in Verg. Aen. 5.250–51: “victori chlamydem auratam, quam plurima circum / purpura maeandro duplici Meliboea cucurrit.”

¹² Hor. Epist. 2. 224–25: “cum lamentamur non apparere labores / nostros et tenui deducta poemata filo.”

¹³ In Ver. G.4.116–46, the gardener stands for the poet himself and his poetic production. I am much influenced here by William Fitzgerald, “Labor and Laborer in Latin Poetry: The Case of the Moretum,” Arethusa 29 (1996): 389–418, and especially at 411, where he refers to farm work and the careful blending of the cheesy moretum: “the process of manual labour also serves to materialize the process of writing itself.”

¹⁴ Note the conjunction of the material and the metaphoric in Hor. Epist. 2.1.268–70 where he suggests that if he wrote unsuccessful sycophantic poetry it would end up, quite appropriately, as the waste paper used as the wrapping for incense, scents, or pepper down in the street market.

¹⁵ Used of the writing of poetry: Prop. 1.7.19; Ov. Tr. 5.12.60; Hor. Sat. 1.4.8; 2.1.63; 2.1.63; Epist. 2.177; 2.2.91; and more generally of other writing Ov. Met. 9.521; Cic. Mur. 12. 26; De Or. 3.43. 171.

¹⁶ Gregory of Tours, LH 9. 40; Baudonivia, Vita Radegundis, 16. On the translation of the relics see Isabel Moreira, “Provisatrix optima: St. Radegund of Poitiers’ Relic Petitions to the East,” Journal of Medieval History 19 (1993): 285–305. The reliquary currently in the Convent of the Holy Cross, Poitiers, does not date to the sixth century. See David Buckton, “Byzantine Enamels in the Twentieth Century,” in Byzantine Style, Religion and Civilisation, ed. Elizabeth M. Jeffreys (Cambridge, 2012), 25–37 at 29–31. The jewel-encrusted cross reliquary sent to Pope John III by the Emperor Justin II and the Empress Sophia between 565 and 578 is the best guide to what the reliquary at Poitiers may have looked like. The sixth-century date for most of that reliquary still held in the Treasury of St. Peter's basilica was established in 2009 by Sante Guido who undertook the restoration: La Crux Vaticana o Croce di Giustino II (Vatican City, 2013), 12–33.

¹⁷ Charles Witke, “The Roman Norm in Merovingian and Carolingian Latin Poetry,” in Saints, Scholars and Heroes: Studies in Medieval Culture in Honour of Charles W. Jones, ed. M. H. King and W. M. Stevens (Collegeville, 1979), 2:1–26.

¹⁸ Carm. Appendix 2, Ad Iustinum et Sophiam Augustos, 65–72.

¹⁹ See Ulrich Ernst, Carmen Figuratum: Geschichte des Figurengedichts von den antiken Ursprüngen bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters (Cologne, 1991), 150–55; Hans Bernhard Meyer, “Crux, Decus es mundi,” in Paschatis sollemnia: Studien zu Osterfeier und Osterfrömmigkeit, ed. B. Fischer and J. Wagner (Freiburg,1959), 96–107.

²⁰ The most recent and complete listing of the manuscripts of the carmina may be found in Marc Reydellet, ed., Venance Fortunat: Poèmes, 3 vols. (Paris, 1994–2004), 1: lxxi–lxxxv. The Holy Cross acrostic, Carm. 2.4, appears in five manuscripts: Paris, BNF MS lat. 8312 fol. 21v, Paris, BNF MS lat. 9347 fol. 83r, Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 5354-5361, fol. 2r, Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, MS C74 sup. fol. 6v, and St. Gall, MS 196 fol. 38.

²¹ The Holy Cross acrostic, Carm. 2.5, appears in four manuscripts: BNF Lat. 8312 fol. 22r, BFN 9347 Lat. fol. 83v, Milan C74 sup. fol. 7r, and St. Gall 196 fol. 39. The St. Gall manuscript also contains another Holy Cross acrostic, St. Gall 196, fol. 40, which Friedrich Leo wisely relegated to the carminum spuriorum appendix of his edition, MGH AA 4.1, 381.

²² The acrostic on the snare, Carm.5.6a, appears in five manuscripts: BNF Lat. 8312 fol. 78v, BFN Lat. 9347 fol. 102v, Brussels 5354-5361 fol. 29r, Milan C74 sup. fol. 22v, and St. Gall 196 fol. 147.

²³ In three of the five manuscripts that include Carm 2. 4: BNF Lat. 8312 fol. 21v, BNF Lat. 9347 fol. 83r, and Brussels 5354-5361, fol. 2r, the versus intexti making up the forked cross itself and the lines making the border surrounding the central word field are all rubricated against a black word field. In the fourth manuscript, Milan C74 sup, fol. 6v, the borders and the versus intexti making up the forked cross are all rubricated while the background word field text was written in brown ink. In the fifth of these manuscripts, which survives in the library of St. Gall, St. Gall 196 fol. 38, the cross shape is depicted in green and both the background word field text, as well as the surrounding border lines, are all written in red. In the case of Carm. 2.5, the two Paris manuscripts, BNF Lat. 8312 fol. 22r, and BNF Lat. 9347 fol. 83v, have their borders and the versus intexti making up the figure of a triangulated central cross rubricated in contrast to the black ink of the incomplete background word field. However the St. Gall manuscript, St. Gall 196 fol. 39, features the central triangulated cross figure in green against a red word field. Milan C74 sup. fol. 7r, has the borders and the triangulated cross figure, written in red, in contrast to the brown ink of the incomplete background word field.

²⁴ Compare the tree imagery used by Fortunatus in his hymns Crux benedicta nitet, 2.1.9; 2.1.17–18, and Pange Lingua, 2.2.6; 2.2.22.

²⁵ See Erich Dinkler, “Bemerkungen zum Kreuz als Tropaion,” in Mullus: Festschrift für Theodor Klauser, ed. Alfred Stuiber and Alfred Hermann, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, Ergänzungsband 7 (Münster, 1964), 71–78. The image of the jeweled cross in Fortunatus's acrostic evokes the Ravenna mosaics. Note the plates in Friedrich W. Deichmann, Ravenna: Hauptstadt des spätantiken Abendlandes, 6 vols. (Wiesbaden, 1958), 3: 359, 387, and the discussion by Angelo Lipinsky, “La ‘Crux Gemmata’ e il culto della Santa Croce — nei monumenti superstiti e nelle raffigurazioni monumentali,” Felix Ravenna fasc. 30 = 81 (1960): 5–62.

²⁶ See Louise M. Rosenblatt, The Reader, the Text, the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work (Carbondale, IL, 1978), 11–17.

²⁷ Stanley Fish, Is There a Text in the Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities (Cambridge, MA, 1980), esp. 305–22.

²⁸ A discussion of literacy and orality in Merovingian Gaul may be found in Yitzhak Hen, Culture and Religion in Merovingian Gaul AD 481–751 (Leiden, 1995), 21–42.

²⁹ These texts are discussed in detail in Brennan, Brian, “Text and Image: ‘Reading’ the Walls of the Sixth-century Cathedral of Tours,” The Journal of Medieval Latin 6 (1996), 65–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁰ Gregory of Tours, LP 12.

³¹ Gregory of Tours, GM 5; Baudonivia, VR 16.

³² Gregory of Tours, LH 2.17.

³³ Fortunatus, Carm. Appendix 31.1–6. Radegund's poetry has not survived.

³⁴ One of Radegund's letters to bishops is reproduced by Gregory of Tours, LH 9.42.

³⁵ Gregory of Tours mentions two letters Radegund wrote to King Sigibert: LH 9.40, something mentioned by Baudonivia, VR 16. Baudonivia also mentions (VR 10) that Radegund wrote to the Frankish kings, intervening in disputes between one and the other and counseling peace.

³⁶ Caesarius, Regula virginum,19.

³⁷ Baudonivia, VR 8.

³⁸ Baudonivia, VR 16.

³⁹ The sortes biblicae, essentially a form of divination, was condemned by a number of fifth- and sixth-century Gallic church councils: Conc.Veneticum A. 461–91 canon 16 (Concilia Galliae CCL 148, 156); Con. Agathense A. 506 canon 42 (Concilia Galliae CCL 148, 210–11); Conc. Aurelianense A. 511 canon 30 (Concilia Galliae CCL 148A, 12); Syn. Autissiodorensis A. 561–605 (Concilia Gallia CCL 148A, 265). Despite this prohibition the practice continued. It is described twice by Gregory of Tours, LH 4.16; 5.14.

⁴⁰ For example, Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Collection, Accession number: BZ.1955.17, a silver cross with a donor inscription on its face. Note also the imperial donor inscription commemorating the Emperor Justin II and the Empress Sophia on the reliquary cross sent by the emperor to Pope John III, in Sante Guido, La Crux Vaticana, 21, plate 15.

⁴¹ Michael Roberts, “Light, Color and Visual Illusion in the Poetry of Venantius Fortunatus,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 65–66 (2011–12), 113–20; Luce Pietri, “Ut pictura poesis: À propos de quelques poèmes de Venance Fortunat,” Pallas 56 (2001): 175–86; Sylvie Labarre, “La poésie visuelle de Venance Fortunat (Poèmes I–IV) et les mosaïques de Ravenne,” in La littérature et les arts figurés de l'Antiquité à nos jours, Actes du XIV^e congrès Budé 25–28 Limoges, août 1998 (Paris, 2001), 369–77.

⁴² On hangings as decoration see López, Gisela Ripoll, “Los tejidos en la arquitectura de la antiqüedad tardiva: Una primera aproximación a su uso y functión,” Antiquité tardive 12 (2004): 169–82Google Scholar; Muthesius, Anna, Byzantine Silk Weaving AD 400–AD 1200 (Vienna, 1997), 124–26Google Scholar.

⁴³ Note the description of decorations of the imperial palace in Corippus, In laudem Iustini minoris 3. 206–7: “clara superpositis ornabant atria velis. vela tegunt postes”; 4.208: “serica per cunctas pendebant vela columnas.” At 3.255–56 we learn that in the throne room a velum, hung in front of the emperor, was then drawn aside to reveal him.

⁴⁴ Deichmann, Ravenna (n. 23 above), 3:108, 109, 110.

⁴⁵ Deichmann, Ravenna, 3:168, 358, 384, 385, 407.

⁴⁶ Itinerarium Egeriae 25. 8: “Qui autem ornatus sit illa die (Epiphany) ecclesiae vel Anastasis aut Crucis aut in Bethleem, superfluum fuit scribi. Ubi extra aurum et gemmas aut sirico nichil aliud vides; nam et si vela vides, auroclaua oleserica sunt, si cortinas vides, similiter auroclaue oleserica sunt.”

⁴⁷ We do not have information about veils and hangings in sixth-century Roman churches but their use is generally assumed. However the Liber Pontificalis covering the lives of the eighth- and ninth-century popes records a great number of papal donations of silk hangings to the major Roman basilicas and churches. See Martiniani-Reber, Marielle, “Tentures et textiles des églises romaines au haut Moyen Âge d'après le Liber pontificalis,” Mélanges de l’École française de Rome, Moyen Âge 3 (1999): 289–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The decoration of the church of St. Felix at Nola in Campania on his feast day is described by Paulinus, Carm.14.98–99.

⁴⁸ Gregory of Tours, LH 2.31.

⁴⁹ Gregory of Tours, VM 2.60: “mane, adveniens ad basilicam sancti, orationi prosternor. Qua expleta, doloris locum velo, qui ante beatum dependebat sepulchrum, attegi … Iterum mane consurgens, pari ut prius modo contacto velo capite, sanus abscessi; VM 4.1: “secretius a pendentibus velis unum sub vestimento iniectum, crucis ab hoc signaculum in alvo depinxi; protinus dolore sedato, sanus abscessi”: VM 4.2; “accessi iterum quaerere sospitatem ad tumulum, tactamque a dependentibus velis, protinus stetit venae pulsus.”

⁵⁰ Agnauva = agnaufa. See the usage in Gregory of Tours, GC 34.

⁵¹ Caesarius, Regula ad virgines, 16; 27 (SC 345, 90; 204).

⁵² The essential guide to the sixteen sections of Caesarius's Rule that deal with textiles is Maria del Fiat Miola. “Permitted and Prohibited Textiles in the Regula virginum: Unweaving the Terminology,” Early Medieval Europe 26 (2018): 90–102.

⁵³ Gregory of Tours, LH 10.16

⁵⁴ Baudonivia, Vita Radegundis, 17.

⁵⁵ Gregory of Tours, GC 104.

⁵⁶ Muthesius, Byzantine Silk Weaving, 19–26. See also idem, “Essential Processes, Looms and Technical Aspects of the Production of Silk Textiles,” in Economic History of Byzantium, ed. Angeliki E. Laiou, 3 vols. (Washington, DC, 2002), 1: 147–68.

⁵⁷ Note for example, the sixth-century Syrian silk twill depicting episodes from the life of Joseph with accompanying Greek captions, now in the Sens Cathedral Treasury, Inventory number B36; the wool hanging showing the goddess Hestia Polyolbos in a field of flowers and surrounded by winged genii holding disks with the names of different blessings given in Greek script, now in the Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine collection, Washington, DC, Accession number BZ.1929.1; the sixth-century woven wool icon of the enthroned Virgin Mary flanked by archangels, their names given in Greek script while a border features the apostles each named in Greek script, now in the Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, OH, Accession number 1967. 44; fragments of a sixth-century wool and linen woven textile depicting St. Theodore, his name given in Greek script, now in the Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, MA, Accession number 1939. 112.1.2; the fifth-/sixth-century linen and wool church hanging, which depicts arches topped by birds and columns with Christograms between them, while across the top is woven the name Phoibammon in Coptic script, now in the Coptic Museum, Cairo, Inventory number 2023; the seventh-century wool and linen woven cloth with Old Testament scenes, now in the Coptic Museum, Cairo, inventory number 1740; the fragment of a fifth-century wool and linen hanging, part of a large curtain and showing a musician next to a decorative border, now in the Coptic Museum, Cairo, Inventory number 7974.

⁵⁸ Caesarius, Regula virginum, 45: “ipsa etiam ornamenta in oratoriis simplicia esse debent.”

⁵⁹ In the revolt of the nuns of Holy Cross convent that occurred in 589–90, after the death of Radegund, there were charges that silks donated as altar cloths were cut up by one of the nuns to make clothes for her relative. See Gregory of Tours, LH 10.15.

⁶⁰ Carm.19, ed. G. Polara, Porphyrius Optatianus Carmina (n. 10 above), 2:61.

⁶¹ Christ as pilot or helmsman: Proclus, Oratio 27.5 (PG 65, 813B–C); Hippolytus, De Christo et Antichristo, 59 (PG 10, 777) speaks of Christ as the “practiced pilot” (empeiros kubernetes). Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 12 has the holy wind, or the Holy Spirit, bringing the ship of believers to safe anchor in the harbors of heaven. Augustine, In evang. Ioh. tract. 2.2 (CSEL 36, 12–13) has the ship of salvation returning “ad patriam.” So also Jerome, Capitulationes libri Iosue, praefatio (PL 28, 506B) and Maximus of Turin, Sermo 49 (CCL 23, 145) both of whom reference the voyage of Odysseus.

⁶² The sole surviving vexillum, from third-century Roman Egypt, is a square of linen cloth 0.47 m wide by 0.50m painted with an image of the goddess Victoria. See the discussion of it by Rostovtzeff, Michael I., “Vexillum and Victory,” Journal of Roman Studies 32 (1942): 92–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Rostovtzeff believed other vexilla may have been woven or even embroidered.

⁶³ Note, for example, how the paradox was earlier highlighted by Jerome, Ep. 107. 2 (CSEL 55, 292): “vexilla militum, crucis insignia sunt. Regum purpuras et ardentes diadematum gemmas, patibuli salutaris pictura condecorat.” (The army standards bear emblems of the cross. The purple of kings and the jewels sparkling on their diadems are decorated with the gibbet sign of salvation).

⁶⁴ Thus the mast of a ship as a sign of the cross in Tertullian, Adv. Marcionem 3.18 (PL 2, 346): “Nam et in antenna navis, quae crucis pars est, extremitates cornua vocantur: unicornis autem, media stipitis, palus. Also the third century Christian apologist Minucius Felix, Octavius, 29 (PL 3, 346): “Signum sane crucis naturaliter visimus in navi, cum velis tumentibus vehitur, cum expansis palmulis labitur.” Hippolytus of Rome, De Christo et Antichristo, 59 (PG 10, 777) also pictured the mast of the ship of the Church as the cross of Christ like a trophy (tropaion). Clement of Alexandria, Paidagogos, 3.11 (PG 8, 633) mentions a sailing ship running before a strong wind as one of the coded nautical subjects that he deemed suitable for Christian signet rings. The mast metaphor is also deployed by Ambrose, De virginitate, 18 (PL16, 297): “Cur enim navis eligitur in qua Christus sedeat, turba doceatur, nisi quia navis ecclesia est, quae pleno dominicae crucis velo sancti spiritus flatu in hoc bene navigat mundo?” See also the fifth century writer Maximus of Turin, Sermo 49 (CCL 23, 145) for the mast that is the cross.

⁶⁵ Gregory of Tours, GM 22.

⁶⁶ Corippus, In laudem Iustini minoris 3. 255–56. Corippus's later comments (4.86–87) on the importance of curtains in the staging of concealment and revelation gives us an insight into the Byzantine aesthetic: “quod vulgo est, vile est: quidquid latet, extat honore; / quodque magis tegitur, pretii maioris habetur.” (That which is commonplace is of little value: whatever is hidden stands out in honor. And thus, the more a thing is covered, the more valuable it is considered.)

⁶⁷ Muthesius, Byzantine Silk Weaving, 124–25, suggests that the covering of images or relics in the West come from the influence of Byzantine silk hangings either placed at the foot of icons or over them. The Byzantine usage of the podea placed below an icon is described by Frolov, Anatole, “La ‘podea’ un tissu décoratif de l’église byzantine,” Byzantion 13 (1938): 461–504Google Scholar. The term katapetasma, orginally used in the sixth century for a veil or curtain separating the sanctuary from the nave of a church, was later used for a veil that covered an icon.

⁶⁸ A lay congregation on occasion can be assumed from the healing cult that attracted pilgrims and sick to the relic. Note Gregory of Tours, GM 5; Baudonivia, Vita Radegundis VR 16.