THE SEVENTH-CENTURY KINGDOM 113For then election did become of crucial importance. An elected
king, drawn from the ranks of the Visigothic nobility, would have to
command a substantial body of support amongst the rest of the
aristocracy. Those who were currently holding office at court were
particularly influential in this respect. Obviously the choice of a new
king was not an easy one to make. Factions must have existed amongst
the aristocracy, the details of which we are now ignorant. As well as
divisions in the palatine nobility, elections to the kingship sometimes
created upheavals in the provinces. Powerful groups of nobles with
military authority occasionally rebelled, either, as in the case of Paul
in 673, to create independent regional kingdoms, or to seek to re-
verse the decision by force of a centrally made election. This latter
might be caused by fear of replacement by the new regime or be in
order to test the capabilities of the new king, who if unsuccessful
might be deserted by his own followers. Even a king who succeeded
in effect by family inheritance, such as Reccesuinth, would not ne-
cessarily be immune from such a challenge. In 653, Reccesuinth,
although already king in association with his father Chindasuinth
(642-653), for four years was faced by the rebellion of Froila in the
north-east.^42 A king's authority was frail until proved in war.
It was not just kingship that was affected by this potential flaw at
the heart of the Visigothic political system: power throughout the
whole of the kingdom was influenced by the changes in the ruling
families. For with the ending or overthrow of a king or dynasty the
position of all office-holders and supporters of the previous regime
would be called into question. In the case of a usurpation those who
had brought the new king into power would expect to be rewarded
with the offices and influence of those who had benefited from the
previous ruler. Some of the latter might succeed in changing sides in
time, but it is unlikely that the majority would. In view of the general
difficulties of royal finance and the dangers inherent upon the exces-
sive alienation of the king's own properties, the confiscation of the
estates of the supporters of the overthrown dynasty provided an ob-
vious means of enabling the new king to reward those to whom he
was indebted or whose goodwill he wished to ensure. Thus a change
in dynasty could have far-reaching consequences for the aristocracy
and significant effects upon the relative local power and influence of
rival noble families. Indeed a change of dynasty could provide occa-
sion for quite a violent upheaval. Thus according to the Frankish
Chronicle of Fredegar (written c. 658) the succession of Chindasuinth in