The Impressive Reign Of Zhao Tuo, Emperor Of Southern Yue

The collapse of the Qin Dynasty between 209 and 206 BCE was a time of remarkable social mobility. Governors, minor officials, and even bandits were able to seize the moment to achieve the ranks of marquise, king, and emperor. In the anti-Qin rebellion that turned into a rebel warlord free-for-all, power was up for grabs to whoever could take and keep it. A certain Liu Bang was the big winner of the upheaval, claiming for himself first the kingdom of Han (in 206 BCE), and then the imperial throne (in 202 BCE), announcing himself to be Emperor Gaozu, the founder of the Han Dynasty in China. Yet, to the south of Emperor Gaozu was another leader born out of the fragmented Qin Empire—it was Zhao Tuo, the self-proclaimed emperor of Southern Yue.

When the rebellions that would prove fatal to the Qin Dynasty broke out in 209 BCE, Zhao Tuo was said to have been a relatively minor magistrate in a province called Nanhai, located in the vicinity of Guangdong, China. His power skyrocketed, however, when he fortuitously managed to become the military commander of Nanhai just as the anti-Qin rebellion was beginning to take off. At first, Zhao Tuo was said to have played both sides in the war. On the one hand, he rallied his troops to set up defenses against potential attacks by rebel warlords, yet he did this while also ridding the province of officials and commanders who were too close to the Qin Dynasty or any particular rebel faction. Through such methods, Zhao Tuo consolidated the local military around himself and formed a regime that sought out the interests not of the Qin government or the rebels, but of their own local region in Southern Yue.

While the Qin army and the rebels fought their war, Zhao Tuo focused on conquering two frontier provinces that were adjacent to Nanhai. By the time the Qin Empire finally fell and the rebel leaders were divvying up kingdoms amongst themselves in 206 BCE, Zhao Tuo had enough land and might to proclaim himself to be the King of Southern Yue. In the aftermath of the Qin Dynasty’s fall, Zhao Tuo apparently maintained his defensive and isolationist policy, going out of his way not to interact with the rebel kingdoms. This, however, worked out in his favor when two rival warlords, Liu Bang and Xiang Yu, forced all of the other rebel kings to choose sides and fight another civil war. As Zhao Tuo had not been interacting with the various rebellion leaders of China, he was able to steer his own kingdom of Southern Yue on a stance of strict neutrality in the war between Liu Bang and Xiang Yu. By the time Liu Bang emerged victorious in 202 BCE and proclaimed himself Emperor Gaozu, Zhao Tuo and his kingdom of Southern Yue had successfully maintained autonomy, whereas the kingdoms involved in the civil war, including both Gaozu’s enemies and allies, started to increasingly feel the weight of imperial authority pressing down on their freedom.

As Emperor Gaozu came to power after years of rebellion and civil war, his reign as emperor was mainly inward-focused, with his immediate goals being the consolidation of imperial power in the empire and the preservation of his fledgling imperial house. Such a mindset from the Chinese emperor was beneficial to Zhao Tuo in Southern Yue, as Gaozu was more likely to spend his resources suppressing dissent or rebellion in his own realm, rather than mobilizing troops to conquer new territory. To minimize the possibility of stoking the Han Empire’s ire, Zhao Tuo developed a state policy of calculated deference and flattery to keep the Chinese emperors both happy and unimposing.

As Zhao Tuo had been a former official of the Qin Dynasty in charge of Qin-conquered territory, many in Emperor Gaozu’s court believed that Zhao Tuo’s kingdom still belonged to the empire, even if the ruling dynasty had changed. Yet, because of Zhao Tuo’s neutrality during the civil war between the rebel factions, Emperor Gaozu did not hold a grudge against the king of Southern Yue and did not seek to punish him at that time. With Emperor Gaozu not pressing the issue and Zhao Tuo doing everything in his power to avoid the question, the Han Empire and the kingdom of Southern Yue coexisted without any formal deals or treaties until 196 BCE, when Emperor Gaozu finally sent a diplomat named Lu Jia to broach the subject of vassalage.  Lu Jia arrived at his destination expecting to see a typical Chinese governor or nobleman, yet he found Zhao Tuo pointedly dressed in the regional garb of Southern Yue instead of the average clothing of imperial China. Zhao Tuo’s assimilation of his kingdom’s culture was one of several mind games he would play on the Han Empire and its diplomats.

While Lu Jia was visiting with Zhao Tuo, the king of Southern Yue agreed to accept a seal of kingship from Emperor Gaozu, which was a symbol of vassalage. Yet, after showing the Han envoy that the Kingdom of Southern Yue had a formidable army and a well-stocked treasury to fund said army, Zhao Tuo was able to turn the negotiations more into the direction of a non-aggression pact. In the end, Zhao Tuo apparently agreed to pretend to be a vassal of the Han Empire (while still retaining complete autonomy) as long as trade continued between their realms, with special importance placed on iron. Emperor Gaozu, for his part, was evidently fine with this agreement as long as his southern border was secure. This quasi-vassal status no doubt caused some complaints and irritation from the Han envoys sent to meet with King Zhao Tuo. Yet, according to Grand Historian Sima Qian (c. 145-90 BCE), Zhao Tuo could appease any grumbling Han stickler for court etiquette by saying, “I have lived among these barbarians for so long that I have lost all sense of manners and propriety” (Shi Ji 97).

By pretending to be a vassal, while really only agreeing to a non-aggression pact, Zhao Tuo maintained peace with the Han Empire for years. The harmony between the two states was threatened, however, when Emperor Gaozu died in 195 BCE. Gaozu’s son, Emperor Hui, officially assumed control of the empire, but Hui’s mother, the capable Empress Dowager Lü, was the real power behind the throne. Empress Dowager Lü was reportedly more open to the idea of sending Han troops to attack the empire’s neighbors than her late husband had been. In one incidence of this, she reportedly urged her generals to attack the Xiongnu nomads, after the Xiongnu leader, Maodun, had mailed her an embarrassing marriage proposition. The generals talked her out of the attack, but the debacle showed that she, personally, had no qualms against attacking neighbors.

Although Empress Dowager Lü had been dissuaded from attacking the Xiongnu, she would have more luck in persuading her ministers and generals to move against the long-reigning King Zhao Tuo of Southern Yue. In an attempt to weaken her neighbor to the south, Empress Dowager Lü halted the flow of iron and metal goods into Southern Yue. This blockade had a peculiar effect on the usually agreeable king. In a rare display, Zhao Tuo completely shed his finely-crafted facade of deference and ignorance, instead letting his darker, more ferocious side leak out into the open. In response to the halt on iron, Zhao Yue martialed his forces and invaded the southern portion of the Han Empire, capturing several towns and cities along the border. To crown his victories, Zhao Tuo proclaimed himself Emperor of Southern Yue, before withdrawing his troops back to more defensible lands in his domain.

Empress Dowager Lü reportedly sent an army under the command of general Zhou Zao to respond to the aggression from Southern Yue. The Han army, however, was shocked by the heat, humidity and disease that it encountered in the southern climate, and its progress fizzled. By the time that Empress Dowager Lü died in 180 BCE, the Han army had not fought a single battle against the forces of Zhao Tuo, nor had it ever invaded into the heartland of Southern Yue. Upon Empress Dowager Lü’s death, the unsuccessful Han army was recalled and the attack against Southern Yue was canceled.

Emperor Zhao Tuo of Southern Yue calmed down after the passing of Empress Dowager Lü. He slipped back into his facade of deference and ignorance as he waited for the new leader of the Han Empire to reach out to Southern Yue. Emperor Wen, a son of the late Gaozu, ascended to the throne after Empress Dowager Lü’s death in 180 BCE, and eventually sent a diplomat to meet with Zhao Tuo. The envoy, once again, was Lu Jia, who had previously traveled to Southern Yue in 196 BCE, during the reign of Emperor Gaozu. Lu Jia was pummeled once again by Zhao Tuo’s carefully aimed deflections and humble excuses. The self-proclaimed emperor of Southern Yue slathered the new leader of the Han Empire with praise, made the usual show of deference, and claimed that his unsavory actions during the reign of Empress Dowager Lü were due to old age. According to Grand Historian Sima Qian, Zhao Tuo even sent a letter to Emperor Wen, apologizing for the fact that “your aged subject, to gratify a whim, presumed in his delusion to call himself ‘emperor’” (Shi Ji 113).

Lu Jia reportedly returned to the court of Emperor Wen thinking that he had finally brought the long-independent ruler of Southern Yue into the feudal fold. Zhao Tuo had apparently promised the envoy that he would abandon his imperial ambitions and henceforth act as a proper feudal king in service of the Han Emperor. Yet, once again, the carefully negotiated terms of this agreement really only rose to the level of a non-aggression pact, allowing Zhao Tuo to run his realm as usual. As stated by Sima Qian, “he continued secretly to use the designations ‘emperor’ and ‘edict’ the same as before within his kingdom, and only referred to himself as ‘king’ and used the other terms appropriate to a feudal lord when he sent envoys to the rulers of China” (Shi Ji 113).

Although Zhao Tuo had claimed to have been an old, delusional man around 180 BCE, he must have been exaggerating—after all, he was incredibly healthy and would go on to live for over four more decades after Empress Dowager Lü’s death. He reportedly had little trouble coexisting with Emperor Wen (r. 180-157 BCE) and Emperor Jing (r. 157-141 BCE). Zhao Tuo, still an autonomous monarch, also witnessed the ascendance of the famous Emperor Wu (r. 141-87 BCE). Yet, as the 130s BCE arrived, Zhao Tuo’s long and peculiar reign was coming to a close. Zhao Tuo, the self-proclaimed Emperor of Southern Yue, was said to have died in 137 BCE, after having reportedly ruled for an unbelievable reign of around seventy years.

Written by C. Keith Hansley

Picture Attribution: (Jade Burial suit of King/Emperor Zhao Mo of Southern Yue (d. 122 BCE), in front of Qin Terracotta Warriors, from Pit 1, both photographed by Gary Todd, [Public Domain] via worldhistorypics.com and Creative Commons).

Sources:

• The Records of the Grand Historian (Shi ji) by Sima Qian, translated by Burton Watson. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.
• http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Han/personszhaotuo.html 
• http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Altera/yue.html 
• https://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5338/ 
• https://www.britannica.com/place/Nam-Viet  

The Not-So-Subtle Way Earl Ælfgar Escaped Outlawry And Banishment

Ælfgar (also known as Algar) was the formidable son of Earl Leofric of Mercia and Godgifu. Of a like mind with the formidable House of Godwin, Ælfgar was a powerful vassal who did not shy away from clashing with his liege, King Edward the Confessor of England (r. 1042-1066). Although Ælfgar was already the heir to the earldom of Mercia, he was given the title of earl of East Anglia around 1053, after Harold Godwinson shed that earldom to take up his late father’s claims in Wessex. In 1055, Harold’s brother, Tostig Godwinson, became the earl of Northumbria. As Ælfgar’s father, Leofric, was still earl of Mercia at that time, an incredible amount of England was ruled by those two families. King Edward the Confessor, likely feeling suffocated by these powerful noble houses, was apparently desperate to free up one of these earldoms from the bloated vassal families. Presumably inspired by such fears, King Edward decided to outlaw Ælfgar in 1055. On this move, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle stated, “Ælfgar, Earl Leofric’s son, was outlawed without any guilt” (ASC 1055), and the Chronicle of Florence of Worcester similarly stated that Ælfgar was outlawed “without any just cause of offence” (AD 1055).

The House of Godwin had, within that very decade, provided a game plan for Ælfgar to follow. Edward the Confessor had exiled the Godwin clan around 1051, but they soon returned to England with their own personal army and navy, which prompted the king to restore their lands and power in 1052. Learning from this, Ælfgar fled to Ireland and recruited a mercenary fleet of eighteen ships. He then sailed this force to northern Wales, where he made an alliance with the local Welsh king, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn, who is often called Griffith by English sources.

After building this Irish-Welsh Coalition, Ælfgar and Gruffydd invaded England and marched their forces in the direction of Hereford. A certain Earl Ralph hurriedly pulled together an army and intercepted the invading forces before they could reach the city. Ralph’s troops, however, were in no fit state for a battle, and they reportedly fled from Ælfgar and Gruffydd almost as soon as the fighting began. In the chaos, the outlawed earl’s troops were said to have cut down between four and five hundred Englishmen, whereas the coalition from Ireland and Wales reportedly lost not a single man. With Earl Ralph’s force in tatters, Ælfgar and Gruffydd broke into Hereford and plundered the city. They did not stay in the city for long, but instead withdrew back into Wales to await the inevitable English backlash. Harold Godwinson did indeed arrive with an army, but he did not chase Ælfgar very far, and instead focused on reassuring and fortifying the city of Hereford. During this standoff, Edward the Confessor was convinced, as Ælfgar likely hoped, to restore the outlawed noble’s legal status and titles. King Gruffydd ap Llywelyn, losing his ally, apparently agreed to a precarious truce with the English—Yet, he would be back at war with England as early as 1056.

Within the decade, history would repeat itself. A second bout between Edward the Confessor and Ælfgar was set in motion in 1057, when Earl Leofric of Mercia died. As Ælfgar was Leofric’s son, he inherited the earldom of Mercia and became even more of a threat to the king.  King Edward the Confessor lashed out at Ælfgar as early as 1058, sentencing the nobleman to banishment. Ælfgar, for his part, stuck to the same plan as before, fleeing to Wales and forming an alliance, once again, with the Welsh king, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn. Yet, Wales was not the only region in which Ælfgar had been cultivating relationships. Instead of turning once more to Ireland for naval support, Ælfgar shocked his English countrymen by calling in a fleet directly from Norway. Florence of Worcester described the banished earl’s quick and effective comeback campaign, saying “supported by Griffyth, king of Wales, and aided by a Norwegian fleet, which unexpectedly came to his relief, he speedily recovered his earldom by force of arms” (Chronicle of Florence of Worcester, AD 1058).

Fortunately for King Edward the Confessor, the troublesome Earl Ælfgar died of vague causes around 1062. The earl’s frequent ally, King Gruffydd ap Llywelyn, followed Ælfgar into death a few years later. Around 1064, Gruffydd was assassinated by his own countrymen after his wars with the English had taken a turn for the worse.

Written by C. Keith Hansley

Picture Attribution: (Scene of the Battle of Hasting by James William Edmund Doyle (1822–1892), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

• The Chronicle of Florence of Worcester translated by Thomas Forester. London: Petter and Galpin, originally published 1854.
• The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle translated by Benjamin Thorpe in 1861 and republished by Cambridge University Press, 2012. 
• https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-178 
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Godwine 
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Harold-II  
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Leofric 
• https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/history/british-and-irish-history-biographies/gruffydd-ap-llywelyn 
• http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/ENGLAND,%20AngloSaxon%20nobility.htm#AelfgarMerciadied1062 
• http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/articles/Penn/history/Godiva.htm  

Gnaeus Marcius Coriolanus And His Revenge Against Rome

Gnaeus (or Gaius) Marcius, according to tradition, was a Roman aristocrat and military leader who lived in the earliest days of the Roman Republic. He was considered a member of the Marcii patrician family in Rome, and ancient historians such as Livy and Plutarch painted Gnaeus Marcius as a staunch, hot-headed member of the patrician faction, as well as a hardliner in favor of suppressing the commoners by any means. It is possible, however, that Gnaeus Marcius’ family originated outside of Rome—it has also been proposed, based on his nickname “Coriolanus,” that Gnaeus Marcius’ ancestors may have actually come from the city of Corioli. Yet, ancient tradition explained his nickname in a different way. Whatever the case, Gnaeus Marcius, himself, was said to have been entrenched in the ruling class of the early Roman Republic.

An ongoing power struggle between the power-hungry oligarchic aristocrats and the liberty-loving masses of the fledgling republic was not the only dangerous situation faced by Rome in the first decade of the 5th century BCE. They were also threatened by the encroaching forces of the Volscians and Aequians. Naturally, the Romans mustered their own military to meet this new threat on the battlefield, and Gnaeus Marcius was one of the officers among the forces of Rome. He made a name for himself in the first clashes between Rome and the Volscians, and particularly showed his prowess during the Roman assault on Corioli, dated to 493 BCE. At the time, Gnaeus Marcius was not in a position of high command in the Roman army, but this did not stop him from leading his own personal band of troops right through the entrance of Corioli to secure a Roman victory. According to tradition, it was this battle that earned Gnaeus Marcius the name “Coriolanus.”

Eventually, the Romans and Volscians settled into a short truce. This temporary halt of hostilities, according to Livy, might have been caused by famine in Rome and an epidemic in Volscian lands, debilitating both sides of the conflict. Boosted by his wartime fame, Gnaeus Marcius Coriolanus began rising higher in the political ranks, and his ruthlessness in war was allegedly matched by his bloodthirstiness in his political maneuvering as a patrician against the masses. He was said to have treated the common people of Rome as if they were an opposing city under siege, starving them from precious food unless they relinquished more and more power to the oligarchs. Such tactics made Coriolanus extremely unpopular among the Roman masses, so unpopular that the other patricians in Rome were willing to throw their comrade under the proverbial bus when the leaders of the commoners began some political maneuvers of their own. Ultimately, a trial was launched against Coriolanus in which (in person or in absentia, depending on the source) he was sentenced to an indefinite banishment from the city of Rome.

Angry at both the masses (for prosecuting him) and the patricians (for abandoning him), the exiled Coriolanus marched with purpose to join the very people he had made a name fighting against—the Volscians—and pledged himself to seeking revenge against Rome. Despite his past violent actions against the Volscians, Coriolanus somehow worked his way into the good graces of a certain Attius Tullius, who is said to have been one of the most prominent Volscian leaders of the time.

Attius Tullius was not only able to have Coriolanus accepted into the Volscian community, but he also managed to encourage the Volscian warriors to trust the Roman refugee in military matters. According to tradition and legend, by the time war between the Volscians and Rome resumed around 490 BCE, Coriolanus had gained such respect and trust among the Volscian communities that he was chosen to lead their military forces against the Romans. He masterfully led the Volscians in two annual campaigns, in which he carved away large swaths of land from Roman control. Livy gave a concise list of Coriolanus’ conquests:

“[Gnaeus] Marcius [Coriolanus] first marched for Circeii, expelled the Roman settlers, liberated the town, and handed it over to Volscian control; he captured Satricum, Longula, Polusca, and Corioli, all places recently acquired by Rome; then after taking over Lavinium, he marched across country into the Latin Way and took Corbio, Vitellia, Trebium, Labici, and Pedum. Finally he marched on Rome and took up a position by the Cluilian Trenches five miles outside the walls” (History of Rome, 2.39).

Coriolanus’ siege of Rome in 488 BCE is an event shrouded by legend and folklore, therefore the tale becomes more odd and vague at this point. As the story goes, the Volscians decided not to assault Rome, itself, but instead settled in for a siege. Coriolanus parked his army near the city and set about systematically ravaging the surrounding countryside. According to tradition, he spared the estates of certain patricians, either due to some small residual sympathy for the patrician class, or more likely, as a piece of psychological warfare meant to drive a wedge between the suspicious commoners and the oppressive oligarchs of the Republic.

While under siege, Rome reportedly became quite an unstable place. Conspiracy theories abounded in the city when the commoners discovered that the estates of the republic’s oligarchs were left untouched while the property of the poor and powerless was raided. Such suspicious thoughts, according to tradition, led the commoners in the Roman military to mutiny, leaving the Republic with inadequate troops to drive off the Volscians by force. With military support shaky, the Roman Republic resorted to diplomacy. According to Livy, Rome sent two separate professional diplomatic missions to the Volscian camp, and when both of these failed, they also sent an additional mission of priests in hopes of swaying Coriolanus to relent from his siege. This group, too, did not accomplish their task. When the diplomats and priests failed, one last group went out to meet with the commander of the Volscians. This final diplomatic effort was reportedly led, oddly enough, by Coriolanus’ mother, wife and children, who, for whatever reason, had not joined him in his exile. From this last set of unique diplomats, Coriolanus faced an unbearable attack—he was scolded by his mother, faced pouts from his wife, and was sobbed at by his children. According to the traditional tale, this was too much for Coriolanus and he led his army away from Rome.

After his withdrawal from the city, Coriolanus faded into history. Many different tales about his death were told, but none of them were definitive. Some, such as Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Plutarch, claimed that Gnaeus Marcius Coriolanus was quickly executed by Attius Tullius and the Volscians after his failure to continue the siege of Rome. Livy, for his part, merely stated that Coriolanus’ fate was unknown, but also went on to claim that Fabius Pictor, Rome’s first historian, had stated that Coriolanus lived to become an old man amongst the Volscians, spending the rest of his days in exile.

Picture Attribution: (Illustration of Coriolanus being confronted by his family, painted by Soma Orlai Petrich (1822–1880), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Written by C. Keith Hansley

Sources:

• The History of Rome by Livy, translated by Aubrey de Sélincourt. New York: Penguin Classics, 2002.
• http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Coriolanus*.html#ref8 
• http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Dionysius_of_Halicarnassus/8B*.html 
• https://www.livius.org/articles/person/coriolanus-gn-marcius/ 
• https://oxfordre.com/classics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-3949#acrefore-9780199381135-e-3949 
• https://www.britannica.com/topic/Gnaeus-Marcius-Coriolanus  

The Peculiar Life Of The Chained Recluse, Saint Hospicius

Hospicius was an obscure holy man who spent his final years in the vicinity of Nice, France. His age and land of origin are unknown, but details of his later life and saintly deeds were recorded by Hospicius’ contemporary, Bishop Gregory of Tours (c. 539-594), who wrote the influential History of the Franks. By the time Bishop Gregory took notice of Hospicius, the latter clergyman had become a complete recluse, living in a walled-off tower in Nice. The tower apparently had no entrances or exits except windows, through which supplies and supplicants could reach the holy man.

Hospicius was an ascetic in both dress and diet. For sustenance, he reportedly lived off only bread, boiled roots, dates and water. As for his clothing, he allegedly wore an uncomfortable combination of metal chains wrapped around his body, over which was worn an additionally aggravating hair shirt. It is uncertain exactly when Hospicius adopted this punishing diet and wardrobe, but once he did commit himself to such an excruciating existence, he reportedly did not relent until he was on his deathbed.

With his spiritual mind and monkish appearance, Hospicius gained a great reputation for saintly acts and holy power. People seeking divine remedies to their problem would wander to the recluse’s tower, hoping that Hospicius could perform a miracle through a window of his walled-off abode. According to the list presented by Gregory of Tours, Hospicius was credited with exorcising multiple demons from various people, as well as healing one man who had been blind since birth and curing another who had been struck deaf and dumb by a terrible fever. In another lauded episode from the saint’s life, Lombard raiders reportedly found Hospicius’ tower and, as there were no doors, they climbed up the structure and broke through the roof or a window. Upon glimpsing at the chained-up, emaciated man in a hair-shirt, the Lombards first assumed that he was a prisoner. Yet, when Hospicius began preaching to them and healing their ailments, the raiders quickly deduced the saint’s occupation. The raiders were reportedly so impressed by the holy man, that they left him in peace, and a few of the Lombards even converted from their Arian Christian beliefs to Hospicius’ own Roman Catholicism.

The death of Hospicius came around the year 581. His lifestyle of self-punishment, with the minimalist diet, as well as the daily wardrobe of chains and a hair shirt, had a devastating effect on the saint’s body. Due to years of constant chaffing, irritation and sores caused by the chain, Hospicius’ body was said to have been visibly “alive with worms” (Gregory of Tours, History of the Franks, VI. 6). As the day of the sickly saint’s death was approaching, Hospicius reportedly had a precise prophecy about his own demise, which convinced him to make arrangements so that his body would be discovered quickly after his time had come. Through his window, the recluse signaled a messenger and sent the person off to inform Bishop Austadius of Nice to arrive at the tower with a crowbar (to break into the structure) after three days, for at that time Hospicius would be dead. On the day of his death, Hospicius was said to have finally removed his chain and died while laying peacefully on a bench. As instructed, the bishop soon broke into the tower, recovered the body, and gave the saint an honorable burial.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Picture Attribution: (15th-century painting of Simeon Stylites, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

• The History of the Franks by Gregory of Tours, translated by Lewis Thorpe. New York: Penguin Classics, 1971.
• https://www.bartleby.com/210/10/153.html 
• http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07489a.htm