Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

420 15. family and friendship in the west
to divest itself of family possessions may, therefore, be taken as illustrative
of the normal endorsement of those aspects of aristocratic or propertied
life.
Land could and did pass through both the male and the female line. This
is clear enough at the beginning of the fifth century from the case of
Melania, and more generally from the evidence of the Theodosian Code. 33
It is also implied by what we know of the estates held by the family of
Gregory of Tours in the sixth century. After his father’s death Gregory and
his mother lived on their estates in the Auvergne and Burgundy. 34 The
Auvergnat estates are likely to have come from Gregory’s father, but the
Burgundian lands must have been in the possession of Gregory’s maternal
kin. It is not, therefore, surprising that the evidence suggests that kin
groups were essentially cognatic – that is, that maternal relatives had considerable
significance – even if modern reconstructions of family trees
tend to emphasize the paternal line. Indeed, the most famous late Roman
family of all, the Anicii, died out in the male line in the course of the fourth
century, and the name was passed on through the female line. 35 Moreover,
although sixth-century Gallo-Roman families have been accorded such
names as Apollinares, Aviti and Ruricii, there is very little evidence that such
appellations were commonly used in Gaul after the fifth century. While it
is true that patterns of name-giving can be established for various families,
most individuals in the sixth century are referred to by a single name only,
even when they are known to have had more than one. All in all, while it is
often possible to reconstruct a patrilineal gens, this was not the only way of
categorizing the family in the sub-Roman west.
The clearest assessment of matrilineal and patrilineal kin comes from
Sidonius Apollinaris. Writing to his friend Aper he says that ‘In any statement
of one’s genealogy the father’s side takes a privileged position; nevertheless,
we owe a great deal to our mothers as well; for it is not right that
some slighter honour should be given to the truth that we were our
mother’s burden than to the fact that we are our father’s seed.’ 36 Sidonius
goes on to describe Aper as the scion of the families of both his parents,
and celebrated his joint origins in the Auvergne and the Autunois. 37 It was
doubtless easier to present both sides of the family as significant because
of the social status of Aper’s maternal kin. Most aristocrats of the fifth and
sixth century, however, appear to have married within their own social
group. Again, a glance at the genealogies which have been reconstructed
for the period reveals how intertwined were those families about whom
33 C.Th. viii.18 (see also ii.24.2; v.1.5; viii.19.1; ix.14.3; ix.42.1; xvi.5.7), ed. T. Mommsen, 2nd edn
(Berlin 1954). 34 Wood (1994) 8. 35 Demandt (1989) 82.
36 Sid. Ap. Ep. 4.21.1, trans. Anderson.
37 Sid. Ap. Ep. 4.21.2. For Sidonius’ own maternal kin, see Harries (1994) 31; for similar attitudes
already in Pliny, see Garnsey and Saller (1987) 128, 141.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008