"Gregory clearly manipulated his portrayal of Fredegund in order to fulfil certain literary and political ends. Reading around Gregory's image of the queen, it is possible to discern competing sets of gender norms, which together build up a picture of the challenges which faced a Merovingian queen in the latter half of the sixth century. This may be the closest we can get to the “real”, historical Fredegund.
We know that the position of queen was not a secure one. Merovingian kings took on and discarded consorts at will, and while the family connections offered by noble or royal birth might be no guarantee of safety, the former slave who had fallen from her husband’s favour was in a still more precarious position. We hear nothing of a formal union between Fredegund and Chilperic. After ousting Audovera, Fredegund was herself put aside to make way for Chilperic’s princess-bride, Galswinth [although she retained Chilperic's favor, and her continuing presence at his side led to the deterioration of his new marriage with Galswinth]. When Fredegund once more returned to Chilperic’s bed after Galswinth’s murder, her place was, as far as we are aware, permanent. Her behaviour towards her stepsons suggests, however, that she always felt some measure of insecurity.
A queen might reasonably expect to gain some measure of security by bearing her husband a son. However, the Merovingians of the sixth century were not in the practice of designating heirs, and several, including Chilperic, had several wives. Gregory tells us that all children of a Merovingian king were considered to have royal blood. This meant, in practice, that all surviving sons of the previous incumbent might have a claim on the kingship. In such a system, none of the king’s sons was given any special status. One way to ensure that this was the case was to give no special status to the princes' mothers. [...] There may through the sixth century have been, if not a requirement, then a certain expectation for kings to prove themselves through acts of war. Fighting in campaigns allowed princes to gain and prove themselves to bands of followers who would then support them in any bid for the throne. Fredegund’s stepsons were older than her own. In 573, Theudebert, Chilperic’s oldest son, was old enough to be sent on campaign to invade several of Sigibert’s cities south of the Loire. Two years later, Merovech was similarly sent on campaign, this time to Poitiers. Of Fredegund's sons at this time, Samson was born while Chilperic was being besieged at Tournai in 575; the next, Dagobert, fell ill in 580 while still unbaptized; though Chlodobert was somewhat older, he had not yet had the opportunity to lead a campaign. Fredegund's stepsons therefore had a considerable head start in building up a band of followers who might assist them in the event of their father's death.
Naturally, Fredegund wished that at least one of her sons would become a king. Lacking any definite security through her marriage, as queen-mother she would enjoy a far stronger position. Thus she took measures to remove her stepsons, rivals to her own children. She allegedly supported Guntram Boso because he had killed Theudebert in 575, and she attempted to have Merovech killed. Some of her actions were defensive: Gregory's trial at Berny-Rivière in 580 was configured in order to bring to book those who had accused Fredegund of infidelity. The accusation may have carried an acute threat because she may have pregnant during the trial. As we have seen, the course of the trial uncovered a plot to have Fredegund removed from court, to kill her sons and to elevate Clovis to the kingship. Fredegund's sons died in an epidemic of dysentery a matter of weeks after the end of the trial, leaving her stepson Clovis as Chilperic's only surviving heir. We are told that he made “unforgivable” remarks about his stepmother, and rejoiced in the fact that he was his father's sole heir. Fredegund may have interpreted his words as a direct threat. Did he intend to ensure that he remained the sole heir? She was informed that Clovis was attracted to one of her servants. Little wonder that she was so concerned about this set of circumstances, as this was how she herself had managed to catch the eye of the king; the LHF alleges that she had been a servant of Audovera, Chilperic's first wife, but had managed to supplant her mistress. Fredegund had nowhere to go – no noble relatives whose estate she could retreat to, and she could hardly expect to fare well under Clovis' regime. She therefore acted out of desperation. She had the servant girl seized, and bound to a stake outside Clovis' lodgings in a manner perhaps designed to signal her intentions towards Clovis himself. She then ordered Clovis murdered.
Not that her actions were entirely motivated by self-interest. Fredegund's murderous machinations also benefitted her husband. This is obvious in the case of the assassination of Sigibert while he was besieging Chilperic at Tournai in 575. But Chilperic also had reason to be wary of his sons. In marrying Brunhild, Merovech had clearly stated his intention to become a Merovingian ruler, and possibly to challenge his father, as he now, in theory at least, had a claim to both the Neustrian and Austrasian kingdoms. The bishop who married Brunhild and Merovech was Praetextatus, bishop of Rouen. Fredegar suggests that the bishop and the queen were conspiring against Chilperic. Brunhild fares very badly in Fredegar's account, so there is good reason to be wary of this assessment, but it is likely that Chilperic was very concerned about the move that his son had made.
While Praetextatus's trial was concerned with Merovech, Gregory's trial was, as we have seen, concerned with an alleged plan to elevate Clovis to kingship. Ian Wood suggests that it is no coincidence that Clovis was killed at about this time. Once again, while Fredegund is credited with arranging for Clovis to be killed, his demise can only have been to Chilperic's advantage, if the young man was truly a part of plots to supplant his father. Gregory even hints at Chilperic's tacit approval, pointing out that he had ordered the young prince to be brought before the queen just as he himself was about to absent himself by going hunting. He perhaps did not wish to dirty his hands with the murder of a son who had become troublesome.
More broadly, Fredegund's actions may have helped to curb in the next generation the sort of violence which characterised the relationships between Chilperic and his brothers. Charibert, Guntram and Sigibert were all Chlothar I's sons by his second wife, Ingund, while Chilperic's mother was Ingund's sister, Aregund. There is no record of either sister playing a part in the succession of her sons. The fact that neither seems to have acted against her stepsons may perhaps be explained by their own close relationship. However, the fact that Chlothar was survived by four adult sons meant that much blood was shed as these kings fought to add to their territories. The initial fighting which took place between the sons of Chlothar I after his death in 561 was motivated in part by Chilperic's dissatisfaction with his share of the patrimony. If nothing more positive can be said about Fredegund's actions against her stepsons, it is probable that they prevented many potential deaths in inter-fraternal fighting. She was never forced to choose between her sons, as Brunhild chose between her grandsons and as Chlothild may have chosen between her sons. Hers was a far simpler choice, and her actions were neither inexplicable nor very far removed in spirit from those of these other two queens.
However, as we have seen, Fredegund proved to be a ready scapegoat. In the pages of the DLH, she was initially linked to the murder of Galswinth only by implication, and by rumour alone to that of Merovech. Yet shortly after the death of Chilperic, while Fredegund was still living under Guntram's protection, Childebert's envoy stated her guilt of these and the murders of Sigibert, Clovis and Chilperic as fact. Even if we accept that there were political motivations for the blackening of her character, why was her responsibility for all these deaths thought plausible?
There may have been aspects to Fredegund's character which laid her unusually open to accusation. One of the duties of a queen was to provide hospitality in the king's household to the group of warriors who surrounded him. Such warriors, especially if they had been raised at the king's household from a young age, looked to the queen as a surrogate mother. Fredegund may have performed this role particularly well, inspiring a loyalty that allowed her to secure the support of the Neustrian nobles for her small son after Chilperic's death.
She may have been particularly skilled at manipulating the networks of power and information between the members of the warband. Fortunatus describes her as “shrewd”, and declared her intelligence an asset to the king, as well as praising her as a mistress of Chilperic's palace. It was expected that a queen would provide counsel to the king, but perhaps Fredegund was particularly known for her faculty or enthusiasm in this regard. Not only would she have counselled him, as was expected, but would have kept her ear to the ground in order to keep him informed of any currents of discontent within the warband. Her adroitness behind the scenes was a double-edged sword: it is impossible now to say whether her personal charisma allowed her to persuade assassins to carry out on her behalf all the murders attributed to her, or whether this observed quality made her the likeliest candidate when a scapegoat was sought.
Because the power of any medieval queen was frequently exercised behind closed doors, the obvious way for her detractors to criticise her activities was to highlight the negative possibilities offered by such a modus operandi. Assassinations, unexplained poisonings, and suspected witchcraft could all be pinned on the queen. The queen’s role as mistress of the house might also fall under suspicion; a role inextricably linked with her role as the king's bedfellow. Fredegund appears to have had a certain personal charm, not necessarily merely physical, which incited not only her husband's passion but made Guntram desirous of her company at table while she was under his protection. For a time, as we have seen, he was resistant to calls for her to be punished for her many alleged crimes. This charm was surely also employed in Chilperic's household. Fortunatus compliments her generosity, a reference, perhaps, to gifts given to members of the warband. Such charms may, however, have laid her open to accusations about her sexual behaviour, particularly from those who found that they were not among those highly favoured. In addition to the slanderous rumours quashed by the trial at Berny Rivière, the LHF claims that Chilperic was murdered on Fredegund's orders when he discovered that she was having an affair. It seems that Fredegund's unusually skilful handling of her role might in itself have been fodder for her enemies."
— Jennifer McRobbie, Gender and Violence in Gregory of Tours' Decem Libri Historiarum, (PhD Thesis, University of St Andrews, 2012)
The union of the Hispanic Visigothic princess Brunhilda and King Sigebert I, the Frankish ruler of Austrasia, stands as one of the most consequential royal marriages of the early Middle Ages. Raised at the Visigothic court in Toledo, Brunhilda was celebrated for her education, diplomatic acumen, and Romanized upbringing—qualities that rendered her an exceptional royal bride.
For Sigebert, surrounded by ambitious brothers, the marriage offered a prestigious alliance that elevated his status within the Merovingian dynasty. The match was strategically designed to counterbalance the growing influence of his rival and brother, King Chilperic I of Neustria.
Originally an Arian Christian, Brunhilda converted to Catholicism in preparation for the marriage, a symbolic act that endeared her to the Austrasian clergy and nobility. On her wedding day in Metz in 566, Brunhilda was still very young, likely in her early twenties. Contemporary poets praised her dignity and beauty, qualities that impressed the Frankish court as she entered her new kingdom. Sigebert, then in his early thirties, received his bride with evident satisfaction. The marriage was politically advantageous, but it was also warmly celebrated; the poet Venantius Fortunatus, in verses composed for the occasion, speaks of Sigebert’s joy and admiration, writing in the elevated language of courtly praise that the king was struck by love for his new queen.
Gregory of Tours and other contemporary sources depict the marriage of Sigebert and Brunhilda as unusually stable and respectful by Merovingian standards. Although the texts do not portray Brunhilda as a formal political partner, they consistently imply that she exercised legitimate influence within the Austrasian court. Sigebert’s evident esteem for her intelligence and bearing further suggests that her authority, though informal, was both recognized and consequential. The couple was blessed with three children: Ingund, Chlodosinda, and Childebert II.
In the kingdom of Neustria, Queen Galswintha was found strangled in 568, a death widely attributed by contemporaries to the machinations of her husband or his longtime mistress Fredegund, who soon afterward became queen. The killing provoked widespread indignation across the Frankish kingdoms. Brunhilda was deeply aggrieved by her sister’s death and became politically and personally hostile toward Chilperic and Fredegund. She did support and encourage Sigebert’s military action against the king of Neustria.
War swept across the Frankish kingdoms. Again and again, Sigebert’s armies prevailed. His captains pressed deep into Chilperic’s lands, seizing cities and forcing the Neustrian king into retreat. At the height of Sigebert’s advance, Chilperic abandoned his strongholds and took refuge in Tournai, nearly defeated.
It seemed that victory was within Sigebert’s grasp. The nobles of Neustria themselves invited him to Paris to be proclaimed their king. He arrived at the city’s gates on the brink of unifying the realm under his rule. And then, at the very moment of triumph, tragedy struck. Assassins sent by Fredegund slipped into the crowd and murdered Sigebert with poison-tipped daggers.
After the assassination of the king, Austrasia was thrust into political turmoil. The sudden vacuum of authority left Brunhilda in a precarious position, for her only surviving son and heir, Childebert II, was scarcely five years old—an age that rendered him incapable of exercising royal power.
Day 14: Fredegund, wife of Chilperic I and mother of Chlothar II (welcome to the middle ages!). She has a negative reputation for seducing her way into power and allegedly attempting to kill her own daughter, but she was a generous patron of religious orders and a shrewd politician. For once, we have a powerful regent who died of natural causes.
Perhaps the best-known example of Fredegund’s resurrection in myth and literature is Shakespeare’s use of her ‘walking forest’ battle strategy in Macbeth.
- Shelley Puhak, The Dark Queens: A gripping tale of power, ambition and murderous rivalry in early France
