Being the church history geek that I am, I try to read as many primary sources as possible. There was a sale on Amazon and I managed to get History of the Lombards by Paul the Deacon for a very decent price. The Lombards are the ancestors of those who live in Southern Germany. I’m not sure if I’m descended from these people as my ancestors are from central Germany. The word Lombard is an anglicized version of Langobard which means “Long Beard”. Apparently these people didn’t like shaving.
So, a monk named Paul the Deacon wrote this history about his people and their affiliation with the Church. Do I recommend this book? Absolutely not. It’s full of errors. Edward Peters is the editor and time and time again he has to point out in footnotes that Paul the Deacon was in error. Let me point out two huge errors. One is on the 717-718 Arab siege of Constantinople. Paul the Deacon writes:
Also at this time this same nation of Saracens came with an immense army, surrounded Constantinople and besieged it continually for three years but when the citizens with great fervor cried to God, many (of the invaders) perished by hunger and cold, by war and pestilence, and thus, exhausted by the siege, they departed.
– History of the Lombards, Book 6, Chapter 47
This is a clear error. The siege was one year. In fact, according to St. Theophanes the Confessor the siege ended on August 15 and was dedicated to the Mother of God. Obviously because this was the feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin into heaven.
But is this a huge error? It’s the length of a siege. No big deal, right? The second error is much more serious. In talking about the King of Persia, Chosroes II, Paul the Deacon writes:
And he without any delay came peaceably with sixty thousand men to Constantinople to the emperor by whom he was joyfully received and in a very suitable manner. And he, with the whole of them, believing in Christ our Lord, was in like manner with all the rest sprinkled with the water of holy baptism and was raised by the emperor from the font and confirmed in the Catholic faith; and having been honored by the emperor with many gifts, he took his wife and returned happy and rejoicing to his own country.
– Book 4, Chapter 50
Isn’t it wonderful that the King of Persia denounce Zoroastrianism and became Catholic? Not to mention his wife and his entire army? The only problem is, it isn’t true. If this story is true, it would have been present in every Roman chronicler and historian in perpetuity. Chosroes II didn’t become Catholic and neither did his wife or army. It’s a bit suspicious also that he was supposedly sprinkled instead of immersed. The normal mode of baptism for the Byzantine Empire was immersion. Sprinkling happened but it wasn’t the norm. One of many pieces of evidence that this episode is fiction.
There are many other blunders in his book. If we can’t trust Paul the Deacon in numerous accounts where we can verify the source, how can we trust him where there is no other corroborating source? We can’t. Don’t read this book. If you want to read a good Church History book that isn’t well known, read The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus. It covers from 428 to 592 AD and it’s a very thorough history. Paul the Deacon’s history can be ignored or forgotten.
Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.