Citer:
It is clear (to me) that the 'Romans' were the towns of Syagrius's former realm. What is meant by the statement that they had 'changed the government under which they had lived from old?' Note that Syagrius, after his defeat at Soissons, did not seek refuge in one of the towns or fortresses still in Roman hands, but fled to the Visigoths, his erstwhile enemies - a desperate move, and only explicable if his former province had rebelled against him, giving him no other choice (and no means, incidentally, of fleeing to Britain).
In all translations and interpretations of this passage I have found, it is meant that's the Arborychi, and not the Romans; that had changed their government. It seems quite logical as the later peace is set between them and the Franks, not between the Romans and the Franks.
That's said, it is very commonly quoted that the Arborychi are the Britons settled in Armorica. Arborychi simply means Armoricans, not Bretons. The term would be applied in the first way to the Armorican
civitates. In the passage it may have been applied to the Bretons but it is in no way explicit.
At this point it seems important for me to emphasis several points:
- Armorica isn't what is going to be Brittany, it was much larger and did encompass much of western Gaul between Loire and Seine, at least all the coastal part, the famous
Tractus armoricanus, and indeed the former tractus would have played a major role against the Franks
- Britons settled only a part of Armorica, that's the westernmost part of it, with some minor settlements outside in the Loire valley and Normandy
- Armorican civitates did reject their roman governement circa AD 410, following the exemple of Britain, this information is given by Zosimes and could be the reference for their "change of government" quoted by Procopius; equally it could have been a reference of the establishment of the Britons in the west
- Armoricans are quoted along Britons (or Letavi) in the coalition of Aetius against Attila by Jordanes in AD 451; they are associated but distinct anyway.
For me, much of northern Gaul save Armorica falls into Clovis' hands after 481 and Syagrius's defeat. Armorica remained, helped by Bretons and possibly by other federates, even Franks. It is much difficult to deduct anything else of our sources. We know no ruler with any degree of certainty before the 6th century in Brittany. It seems that the Armoricans kept anyway an importante power. They had a romano-gallic culture, and it's possible that part of their elite sent word for the Britons to help them against Clovis, but some could have been opposed to them. In the late 6th century for exemple, the bishop of Vannes was more a supporter of the Franks than of the Bretons of Waroch.