Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Spain still Roman in 494 AD?
#1
I have already posted a Thread about early Roman military history. Now i need to get some information on very late Roman military history. The " Consularia Caesaraugustana" , a very important historical document from 6th century Spain states , that Spain was finally conquered by the Visigoths in 494 AD. In 496 AD , there was still a Roman usurper called Burdunellus , who rebelled against Visigothic rule, this fact would support the " Consularia Caesaraugustana". But is it really possible, that some parts of Spain were still Roman in 494 AD? What are your opinions?
Reply
#2
Could depend on what you think being Roman means at the time :-)

However, I would think that somebody rebelling against the Visigoths would quite easily and logically use, or be described as, "Roman" as much as a way of distinguishing them - especially if they were of Roman descent. The Empire provided the blueprint of what valid authority was and so would be a powerful label to adopt.
Reply
#3
(01-01-2019, 11:00 PM)Barbula Wrote: But is it really possible, that some parts of Spain were still Roman in 494 AD? What are your opinions?

Kulikowski has argued that Spain ceased to be Roman on the death of the emperor Majorian in AD 461: Late Roman Spain and Its Cities. He found that, after that date, no more Roman officials are heard of in the diocese.
posted by Duncan B Campbell
Reply
#4
(01-02-2019, 03:17 PM)D B Campbell Wrote: Kulikowski has argued that Spain ceased to be Roman on the death of the emperor Majorian

Kulikowski's 1997 doctoral thesis from the University of Toronto is available online, and addresses this subject directly: The End of Roman Spain.

Determining just who was in charge of this or that bit of Spain after AD409 is pretty tricky; undoubtably the administration in Rome claimed to rule all or most of it, until the final collapse of the western government, but how effective that rule was in practice is debatable. A lot of what appears to be 'Roman' government, or Roman military campaigning, may have been entirely 'barbarian', with Gothic leaders in particular taking Roman military rank and claiming Roman authority for their actions.

Similarly, local potentates seem to have invoked the power of Rome as a way of buttressing their own purely local authority; Leonard Churchin's Senators or Curials is interesting for the continuance of Roman titles (and, presumably, wider Roman identification and aspirations) among the Romano-Spanish possessores through into the sixth century.

(I'd never heard of Burdunellus though - thanks for that note!)
Nathan Ross
Reply
#5
I agree with those above that the question would be 'what do we consider Roman'?
If it's cultural, I woul say yes - Spain was not 'Gothic' o barbarian by 494, and the new rulers would use Roman sytems and leave laws in place.
If it's military, there are those who claim that Rome lost Spain (speaking of the province) already after the early decades of the 5th c., controlling just parts of it.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
#6
I agree with you , Robert Vermaat, it is very important do define " still Roman" in 494  AD. But with this expression I mean the presence of a still full romanized state in Spain ,with a Roman aristocracy and a Roman leader, which still had independent military forces , like Syagrius in Soissons. 
Unfortunately , there are not many sources on late Roman Spain, but it is known , that there was a Roman usurper , Burdunellus,against the Visigothic rule in 496 AD.  It is known by literary sources , that king Eutic of the Visigoths had finally conquered most of modern Spain in 484 AD. The army of Syagrius capitulated in 486 AD , and parts of Roman Provence did not surrender until 477 AD. These facts indicate , that there could have also been Roman resistance in Spain  after the fall of the Western Empire.So could it be possible, that there was still Roman resistance in Visigothic Spain, not especially in 494 AD, but between 476 and 496 AD?
Reply
#7
(01-07-2019, 12:07 AM)Barbula Wrote: a still full romanized state in Spain ,with a Roman aristocracy and a Roman leader, which still had independent military forces... still Roman resistance in Visigothic Spain

The Roman aristocracy (landowners) certainly remained, but I doubt there was much state infrastructure after 460, or even perhaps earlier. What would have remained is the church, which mirrored the secular hierarchy and would have taken on a lot of the authority of government, with bishops coming from the higher levels of the local landowning class and acting as leaders.

At the other end of the social scale we have the bacaudae - a mysterious bunch who could have been rebellious peasants, independent-minded provincials, small-scale usurpers or anything in between. The Roman state launched a series of military campaigns against them in Tarraconensis in the 440s, but they kept reappearing.

So, while the church and the landowners probably found ways to accommodate themselves to barbarian rule, those lower down the scale perhaps did not - I expect 'Burdunelles', who from his name was probably not a very high-class person, was one of them. Ironically, it could have been the bacaudae who put up the last 'Roman' resistance to the barbarians in Spain!
Nathan Ross
Reply
#8
There's a name for Romans in Spain in the post-Roman period but I can't remember the name for them. Starts with an A? I need to ask the Spanish reenactors again.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Late Roman Fortifications in Spain - help SMC 13 2,285 11-29-2010, 08:46 AM
Last Post: Robert Vermaat
  Roman Spain / Travel Guide Jona Lendering 3 1,120 09-24-2009, 09:10 AM
Last Post: Thersites
  New roman camp discovered in Spain Iagoba 5 1,762 01-17-2008, 08:02 PM
Last Post: searcher

Forum Jump: