Vandale (langue)
Aller à
:Navigation,Rechercher
|
Vandale |
|
|
Parlé en |
|
|
Région |
— |
|
Nombre de locuteurs |
0 |
|
- Langues
indo-européennes |
|
|
(Dérivée de la
classification SIL) |
|
|
Statut officiel et codes de langue |
|
|
Régi par |
aucune |
|
ISO 639-1 |
— |
|
ISO 639-2 |
— |
|
ISO 639-3 |
— |
|
— |
|
|
Voir aussi : langue, liste de langues, code couleur |
|
Le vandale était une langue germanique probablement
liée au gotique, parlée par lepeuple vandale.
Originaires du Scandinavie, les Vandales sont repoussés par les Goths en Europe centrale, d'où ils se dirigeront, au début
des invasions
barbares, vers le sud de l'Espagne(atteinte en 409), aux côtés des Suèves et
des Alains. La région Andalousie leur
doit peut-être son nom. Ils s'y installent comme fédérés
de Rome sous leur
roi Gundéric, avant de passer en Afrique du Nord (429) sous leur roi Geiséric, pressés par lesWisigoths. Leur royaume en Africa romana, fondé en 439 (prise de Karthago, qui devient leur capitale), sera par la suite détruit
lors de la reconquête byzantine orchestrée
par l'empereur Justinien entre 533 et 534.
Au cours de ces événements, la langue vandale
disparaît avec son peuple: sur le sol de la péninsule ibérique,
elle a été absorbée par le wisigothique et le royaume
vandale a connu un processus de romanisation, avant que ses sujets ne soient
absorbés par la population nord-africaine.
Cette langue est fort peu connue. On sait seulement qu'elle fait
partie du groupe deslangues
germaniques orientales, étroitement liée au gotique.
Seuls quelques noms vandales sont connus. Il en resterait des traces en andalou, dialecte du castillan parlé
dans le sud de l'Espagne.
Un fragment de vandale apparaît dans un poème méprisant
écrit en latin vers 390 et intitulé De conviviis barbaris :
Inter eils Goticum scapiamatziaiadrincan
Non audet quisquam dignos educere
versus.
(« Parmi les Goths eils scapiamatziaiadrincan,
On n'ose pas produire
des vers dignes. »)
La partie de ce poème en vandale est compréhensible
et semble correspondre au gotique hails !
skapjam matjan jah drigkan !, dont le sens
est « Salut ! Prenons de la nourriture et buvons ! ».
La seule autre phrase connue en vandale est Froia arme !, qui signifie
« Seigneur, prends
pitié. »
PASSAGE DE
PEUPLES BARBARES AU PORTUGAL
http://portugaltourisme.free.fr/historia/vandalessueves.htm
Suite à l'a fragilisation
de l'Empire Romain, avec les Quades,
les Suèves et les Alains, les Vandales franchissent le Rhin en 406 et
traversent
LES VANDALES ET LES ALAINS
(409-429)
Les Alains venaient de la
région caspienne, où leur empire avait été
détruit par les Huns en 375 en même temps que l'état
gotique d'Ukraine. Ils durent alors suivrent les autres Germains au Nord du
Danube et franchir ainsi le Rhin. Les Alains commandés parGoar passent au service de Rome en 407.
Mais les Alains de Répendial décident de suivre les Vandales et atteignent l’Ibérie
(409) où ils
s’établissent comme fédérés. En effet, il
semble qu’en 411 l’empereur Honorius ait établi un foedus qui attribue
aux Suèves et à une partie des Vandales (Asdings)
Les Vandales Asdings
installés avec les Suèves en Galice, attaquent ceux-ci en 419
mais la mort de leur Roi Gundéric (« Roi de
Plus tard, lorsque Boniface,
commandant en chef des troupes de Lybie (englobant tout le Nord de
l’Afrique de Carthage aux colonnes d’Hercule), suspecte Galla Placidia et l’empereur Valentinien de vouloir le destituer, il aurait
conclu une alliance avec les Vandales installés en Espagne [Procope, Guerres de Justinien, III,
III, 14-26]. Sur l’invitation de Boniface lui-même, 80.000 vandales [Procope, Guerres de Justinien & Victor de Vita, histoire de la persécution
vandale en Afrique] auraient
franchit le détroit de Gibraltar en 429, toujours commandés par
le fameux Genséric, pour y fonder leur royaume. Les dissensions entre
Romains et Vandales ne tardent pas et Genséric assiège Hippone
dès 430. Ils n'accèdent à Carthage qu'en 439.
LES INVASIONS SUEVES (419-585)
Les Suèves qui ont suivi la pérégrination des Alains et
des Vandales sous le règne du roi Hermaric s’installent en 408-409
entre le Douro et le Minho, puis constituent un royaume allant du Tage à
la chaîne cantabrique. Hermaric prête serment à l'empereur
romain Honorius et choisit Braga comme capitale. A cette époque, le Nord
du Portugal constitue un pôle religieux important, drainant tous les
intellectuels de la région, de
Cherchant à agrandir leur domination vers le sud et l'est, en lutte contre
les autres bandes armées barbares, ils sont battus par les Wisigoths de
Wallia en 418 et sont forcés de se cantonner en Galice et au Nord du
Portugal. Braga, Porto, Lugo, Vigo et Orense sont leurs principales places
fortes. En 429, lors du transfert des Vandales en Afrique, ils cherchent
à nouveau à étendre leur territoire mais sont en butte aux
pressions des Wisigoths qui cherchent eux aussi à s'installer dans la
péninsule. Leur roi Rechila aurait réussit à
conquérir Mérida en 439 et Séville en 441.
Son successeur Réchiare cherche à s'allier les Wisigoths et se
marie avec la fille de Théodoric Ier en 449 à Toulouse. En
revenant il pille Saragosse et annexe Llerna. Il fut le premier Roi
européen chrétien à frapper sa propre monnaie. Entre 452
et 455, Réchiaire va
profiter de problème de succession sur le trône wisigoth pour
étendre sa domination sur une grande partie de l’Espagne [Jordanès,Histoire des
Goths, XLIV, 229-230]. Les Wisigoths estiment alors que c’est une
atteinte à Rome et envoient une armée : Les deux armées
s’affrontent en 456 près du rio Orbico(Astorga) non loin de
l’actuelle frontière portugaise. [Jordanès, Histoire des Goths, XLIV,
232].
La défaite des Suèves les assujettis alors pour un temps au
pouvoir Wisigoth. Leur royaume est divisé en deux : La partie sud est
sous influence wisigothe et est dirigée par Agiulf placé au
pouvoir par Théodoric II. La partie nord reste sous contrôle
suève avec Framta. Les deux royaumes se livreront alors une guerre sans
merci jusqu'à leur réunification en 464 sous l'égide de
Rémismond qui prend le titre de Roi de tous les Suèves. Les
Suèves n’auront depuis la défaite de 456 plus de
visée expansionniste mais se contenteront de raids destructeurs en
Lusitanie. En 459 une luttre de pouvoir entre Rémimond et Frumaire
entraîne la destruction quasi-totale de l'antique Aquae Flavia (Chaves, Portugal). On leur doit aussi
la destruction de l'antique cité romaine de Conimbriga(468). Pendant un
temps, leur réputation de sauvagerie retentit dans toute la
péninsule… Ils restent en conflit permanent avec les Wisigoths qui
ont étendu leur empire aux limites de leur territoire. Les Suèves
maîtrisent pourtant mal leur conquêtes car ils sont plus
motivés par l’appât du butin et la recherche des esclaves
que par un désir de coloniser, d’encadrer la population
(contrairement aux Wisigoths…)
Les Suèves et les
Wisigoths se battent pour le contrôle de la région du
Tràs-Os-Montes (Portugal) et la montagne d’Orense (Espagne). Leur
problème politique avec les Wisigoths se résout en une question
religieuse ; Les Suèves hésitent sur le choix de leur religion.
Mal convertis aux Christianisme en 448 par Rechiarius (50 ans avant Clovis.),
ils subissent l’influence directe des Wisigoths et se convertissent
à l’arianisme en 466.
Liste des rois
suèves :
* 409 - 438 : Herméric ou Ermaric;
* 438 - 441: Herméric et Rechila (co-règne);
* 441 - 448 : Rechila;
* 448 - 456 : Rechiaire ou Rechiar;
* 456 - 457 : Agiulf (partie sud);
* 456 - 457 : Framta ou Frontan (partie nord);
* 457 - 459 : Maldras;
* 459 - 459 : Rémismond (partie sud);
* 459 - 463 : Frumaire (partie sud);
* 459 - 463 : Réchimond (partie nord);
* 459 - 469 : Rémismond (réunification, roi de tous les
Suèves);
* (période méconnue
faute de sources)
* Veremund (469-508?)
* Rechila II (484-?)
* Réchiaire II (508-?)
* Hermeneric II (?)
* Riciliano (?)
* Theodemund (520-550)
* 550 - 558 : Cariaric
* 558 - 570 : Théodemir
* 570 - 582 : Ariamir . L'historien Grégoire de Tours le nomme Mir ;
* 582 - 583 : Eboric;
* 583 - 585 : Andeza.
L’ARIANISME
Doctrine d’Arius, prêtre d'Alexandrie au début du
IVème siècle après J.C., qui reconnaissait dans
Source : Grégoire de Tours (extrait) : dialogue
entre un franc catholique et un wisigoth arien
History of the Vandals
by Brian Adam ('Gaiseric')
It's not known to many people
today that long time ago the Vandal warriors, a Germanic tribe, once
established a kingdom in North Africa as their base for raiding the
Mediterranean Sea, much like the Vikings. Like the Goths and Attila's Huns, the
Vandals helped bring about the Roman Empire’s decline.
Who were the Vandals ?
Vandal was a Germanic people
belonging to the family of East Germans. The term “Vandilii” is
used by Tacitus in his Germania. They settled between the Elbe and Vistula. At
the time of the Marcomannic War (166-81 AD) they lived in what is now Silesia.
During the 3rd century when the Roman Empire was in crisis with many powerful
enemies at their borders, the Vandals and their ally Sarmatians did invade the
Roman territory along upper Rhine river in AD 270. About AD 271 AD the Roman
Emperor Aurelian was obliged to protect the middle course of the Danube against
them. In AD 330 they were granted lands in Pannonia on the right bank of the
Danube by Constantine the Great. Vandals accepted Arian Christianity during the
reign of Emperor Valens in the AD 360’s. Before this, there is mention of
two branches of the Vandal Confederacy: the Siling Vandals in the northwest and
the Asding Vandals in the south.
Breach of the Roman Frontier in AD 406
The kingdom of the Alans (non
Germanic descendants of the Scyths) that lay to the east side of the
Ostrogothic Kingdom in south Russia, was the first of the Hun conquest driving
into Europe from Central Asia. Some of the Alans escaped to westward and the
rest fell under the Hun rule. The Great Ostrogothic Kingdom that covers the
area between Baltic and Black Seas under powerful King Ermanarich, fought the
Huns once they appeared in eastern Europe and invaded their land in
370’s. The Ostrogothic cavalry was humiliated by the faster-moving Huns,
whose mounted archers destroyed every force Ermanarich sent against them. The
fall of the Ostrogothic Kingdom and death of Ermanarich in South Russia, the
related Gothic clans (later know as Visigoths) grew fearful of the Hunnic
warriors and decided to appeal to Rome to grant them refuge. The Romans gave
them permission to cross the river Danube into Roman territory, once they had
suffered defeat by the Huns. Many Goths however followed them into Roman
territory without such permission. Other Germanic tribes such as Gepids,
Rugians who were not under the Ostrogothic Kingdom, were also defeated and
subjugated by the Huns. Worried that they would be next, the Asding Vandals
began to stir. By early fifth century, closely pursued by the Huns, the two
branches of Vandals (Siling and Asding) and other Germanic tribes: Suebi (once
called the Marcomanni and Quadi),Alamanns, Burgundians and a clan of Alans
(non-Germanic, displaced from the Caucasus) went on the move. There was a large
number of barbarians that wait lying across the river Rhine, one cold and
frozen night in December AD 406. They surprised the Romans and breached the
Frontier at Mainz. The Roman defences would not stop them pouring into Gaul for
months. The border had been weakened as a year previous the Roman General
Flavius Stilicho (his background was a Vandal) had been forced to collect some
Roman soldiers posted along the Rhine, in order to defend Rome from the Goth
King Alaric and his army. With the Roman frontier breached, many hundreds of
thousands of barbarians settled in Gaul, various barbarian bands roamed
unchecked across large parts of Gaul for two and half years. It was the worst
ravaging of Gaul than ever before. Finally the two branches of the Vandals
(Siling and Asding), as well as the Suebi and Alans, crossed the Pyrenees into
Spain after being defeated by the Franks in battle and being harassed by the
Goths (Visigoths). Within two years of being in Spain, the various conquering
tribes dividing up their spoils, apparently by lot, the Siling Vandals and
Alans taking the richest area, Baetica in the south, while the Asdings and Suebi
took the north – Galicia.
Gunderic, the Vandal King up to AD 428
During the late AD 410’s
and early 420 the Romans tried to evict the Siling Vandals and Alans from
southern Spain. To this end they employed the Visigoths to drive the Silings
and Alans out, in fact they finally succeeded in ruining them. Though the
Romans feared the Visigoths becoming too powerful and offered them to settle in
southeast Gaul in AD 418. The Asding Vandals moved south to rejoin their
kindred and the joint kingdom proved strong enough to be viable, so becoming a
Vandal Kingdom. Gunderic was their leader since sometime in the 410’s.
This left the Suebi Kingdom in control of the northwest of Spain. When the
Alans lost their leader Ataces with almost all his army in battle against
Vallia the King of the Visigoths 419 AD, the remainder of these Alans subjected
themselves to Gunderic King of the Vandals in Baetica, who therefore became
King of the Vandals and Alans.
At the beginning of the
420’s, the Vandals won a great victory against a Romano-Gothic army led
by Castinus. This helped them to further enrich themselves by raiding in
Mauritania and the Balearic Islands. Many Roman ports in Spain were captured
including many of galleys within them and so the Vandals became the first Teutonic
people to develop a Mediterranean navy.
Gaiseric, The Vandal King AD 428-477
King Gunderic died and was
succeed by his half-brother, a bastard named Gaiseric (his mother being an
unknown concubine of the Vandal King) The name, of which there are various
spellings (also Geiseric and Genseric) means the 'Caesar King'. He was a more
clever and shrewd diplomat as well as military leader (excellently trained in
warfare) than any Vandal leader before or after him. He led his Vandals to
repulse the imperial offensives and gave gifts to Attila the Hun for attacking
the Romans and Visigoths in the 440’s-50’s. He was undisputed King
of the Vandals and Alans in AD 428.
Boniface’s Crisis in North Africa
In about 428 AD, Boniface (warlord),
Count of North Africa, controlled six whole provinces. He suffered serious
problems as a governor, among them legal disputes, Christianity (disappointing
St Augustine by marring an Arian), and bad relations with Moorish tribesmen.
More so Roman General Flavius Aetius saw Boniface as a rival. Aetius persuaded
Empress Placidia, who acted as regent for her son the future Emperor
Valentinian III, that Boniface was disloyal to her and had tyrannical
aspirations for himself in North Africa. Further she was advised to summon
Boniface in order to assure his future loyalty. So she sent word to Boniface to
come to the imperial court at Ravenna to explain his failure in north Africa.
Aetius secretly sent Boniface a private message advising him that Placidia was
planning a plot against his life. Aetius was pleased to see his plan succeed as
Boniface declined to appear at the court and was subsequently accused of
treason and declared a rebel.
Placidia sent the imperial army
to arrest Boniface but he managed to repulse them. Then the Vandals crossed the
straits of Gibraltar, suddenly arriving in North Africa and begun to raid.
Placidia decided to send her army to re-attempt arresting Boniface. Meanwhile
Aetius’ fraud was discovered by Boniface who sent his friend to see the
empress to sue for peace in order to allow him to deal with the Vandal raiders.
The Invasion of Africa
Why did the Vandals come into
Africa ? Had it been arranged with Boniface or was it just a normal invasion ?
It still remains a mystery to this day. We have two different stories below:
First, King Gaiseric was invited
into Africa by a rebellious Boniface who was keen to recruit their support
against the army of empress Placidia. They were offered lands in north Africa.
After Aetius' fraud was discovered Boniface appealed King Gaiseric to turn
home. But it was too late as King Gaiseric was fully aware that Boniface was
weakened by the civil war with the empress and so he landed in North Africa and
turned against Boniface.
The other story states that King
Gaiseric had suffered a severe fall from his horse which left him permanently
lame. From that point on he experienced trouble riding and hence sought to
satisfy his need for excitement and raiding by seaborne expeditions. Soon the
Vandal fleet grew too strong for the Roman navy and raided the coasts of the
western Mediterranean Sea. Gaiseric knew that the North African provinces were
the chief suppliers of grain and oil to the Empire and decided to conquer them.
King Gaiseric landed North Africa
with over 80,000 men including Alans, Roman-Spaniards, former slaves and
several Germanic tribesmen with their families. They seized lands from the
local Berbers and some Romans near Tingi (Tangier), from there they overran the
country and spread all over Mauritania. There was no limit to their savage
atrocities and cruelties. Everything within their reach was laid waste, with
looting, murders, tortures of all kinds, brigandry, and countless other
unspeakable crimes, without any mercy to men, women, children, priests and
ministers of god. Also they destroyed church buildings. As the Vandals were
Arians, made the war with the Catholic Romans especially bitter. The armies of
Gaiseric defeated Boniface in battle and went on the rampage forcing Boniface
to retreat to fortified coastal town of Hippo Regius, now Bona.
14 Months of Resistance
All the refugees were crowded
into the walled town of Hippo Regius before Gaiseric came. He realised himself
unable to capture the town in a direct assault, so he laid siege. Boniface and
his people saw the Vandal siegeworks grow longer and stronger, depriving them
even of their sea links. St Augustine and his priests prayed together for a
hasty relief, strengthening the resolve of the citizens against the Arians.
Three months into the siege of Hippo Regius, St Augustine died on August 28th
AD 430. Boniface was the one to be blamed for St Augustine’s death.
Desperately to be rescued by the empire, Boniface sent messengers who did break
through the Vandal lines but for months they nothing heard from Constantinople.
After 14 months, hunger and disease were ravaging the Vandals as much as the
besieged inhabitants of Hippo Regius. News reached Gaiseric’s camp,
Constantinople had responded sending a powerful imperial fleet that brought an
army under the leadership of Aspar and landed at Carthage which still remained
in Roman hands. Boniface joined forces with Aspar and took the field a second
time against the Vandals but was completely routed. Unable to defeat the
Vandals, he called for negotiations. Gaiseric decided to relax the siege and
entered into negotiations. Gaiseric still maintained the upper hand and
dictated terms. Boniface was allowed out of Hippo Regius with his bodyguard,
families were permitted to leave. Having failed to stop the Vandals, Boniface
handed power to Aspar and sailed to Italy to see empress Placida, who invested
him with the office of Magister Militum. General Aetius was furious. Boniface
died from a wound he received in his victorious battle agasint Aetius and his
army in AD 432.
Improved Relations
General Aspar established better
relations with Gaiseric, as Aspar was an Alan by birth and Gaiseric’s
official title was “King of the Vandals and Alans”. They exchanged
gifts and ambassadors, Hippo Regius became the Vandal city while Aspar
maintained imperial authority in Carthage. Gaiseric had won for his people an
independent kingdom in North Africa, the first and only assault on this rich
province by Germanic Barbarians.
Arians vs Catholics in North African
The Vandals treated the Catholics
more harshly than other Germanic tribes, Catholic communities were disolved and
any priests refusing to perform the Arian service were banished or enslaved for
decades. It is said of Gaiseric himself that he was originally a Catholic and
had changed to Arianism before coming to North Africa.
Surprise Capture of Carthage
Peace was made between the Romans
and Vandals as the division of the coastline was officially acknowledged in AD
435. However Hippo Regius was an excellent port for expeditions, all raiders
paying a proportion of their booty to Gaiseric. His raiders attacked the coasts
of Sicily and sacked some cities. Since Aspar had returned to Constantinople in
434 AD the Carthaginian defences appear to have been weak. Gaiseric, interested
in Carthage’s port with its many ships and galleys anchored there, sought
to make it another Vandal city. His son Huneric who was held by the court at
Ravenna as hostage of peace, was soon released and returned home, where he led
his army in a surprised attack on Carthage on 19th October AD 439 (according to
Hydatius, Gaiseric captured it by trickery). As Carthage fell into
Gaiseric’s hand, to celebrate the achievement, the Vandals made 439 the
first year of a new calendar.
Fall of Carthage to the Vandals
agrieved the western and eastern empire, as there was a large number of galleys
and a great shipyards in Carthage, creating the Vandal fleet as the equal to
the joint navy of the two empires. That the empire ever allowed for so many
galleys to be left in Carthage's port while the Vandals were so close by, must
be one of the most monumental blunders of it’s history. For the first
time in nearly 6 centuries, Carthage became the greatest danger to Rome since
the Punic Wars.
Wars
In the spring of 440 AD, a vast
fleet manned by Vandals and their allies (Alans, Goths, Romano-Barbarians, and
Moors) set out from Carthage for Sicily, the principal supplier of oil and
grain to Italy after the loss of North Africa. All the coastal towns were
looted and Palermo besieged. Heavily laden ships returned to the court of
Gaiseric. The powerful eastern imperial fleet responded by sailing into
Sicilian waters in 441 AD, taking the Vandals by surprise. This was under the
command of the Romano-Goth Areobindus, but a major invasion of the Balkans by
the Huns and the threat of a Persian attack, forced him to take his fleet back
home. After this Gaiseric allowed his fleets to continue plundering throughout
the western Mediterranean Sea.
Arrangement of a Marriage to make Peace
There was a marriage proposal for
Eudocia, daughter of the western emperor Valentinian and King Gaiseric’s
son Huneric. It was a great honour for the Barbarian leader. However, whose
idea was it ? It seems possible that General Aetius, who became chief defender
of the western empire, realised the impossibility of defeating the Vandals in
battle. From another point of view, it could be that emperor Valentinian
desired a powerful alliance with a barbarian force that would counter-balance
the considerable power of Aetius with his Huns and Goths. Whoever's idea it
was, the political result must have seemed promising to both sides for it led
to King Gaiseric’s first major political blunder.
Huneric was already married to a
Visigoth princess when the imperial offer of marriage arrived. King Gaiseric
decided free his son from such prior obligtions by allowing the poor Visigoth
princess to be accused of trying to poison him. Her ears and nose were cut off
and she was sent back to her father Theoderic the Visigothic King, in Toulouse,
Gaul. These enraged King Theoderic and he swore revenge, making Vandals and
Visigoths enemies. But King Gaiseric sat back and enjoyed the fruits of his
African estates, as there was little chance of serious conflict between his
kingdom and the empire or the Visigoths.
Sack of Rome AD 455
In 454, Emperor Valentinian
murdered Aetius. The follwing year Valentinian was stabbed to death by
Aetius’s follower. The story goes that Eudoxia, the widow of the emperor,
was then forced to marry Maximus against her will. Petronius Maximus was
generally believed to have been the grandson of the usurper Maximus who had
been crushed by the Theodosius the Great. He had been Consul at age 38 and
became Praetorian Prefect of Italy six years later. He became emperor of the
West Empire after Valentinian’s death.
The widow Eudoxia knew that an
appeal to Constantinople would have little chance of being answered. Sp she
decided to write to Gaiseric, inviting him to take possession of Rome. However
no invitation was needed, Gaiseric’s peace treaty had been with Aetius
and Valentinian. Now they were dead and so was the treaty. Emperor Maximus who
hurried to get his son married to Eudoxia instead of Huneric, to whom she was
long since promised, angered Gaiseric. The Vandal fleet had been built up for
the last ten years and now awaited a major expedition.
A major Vandal fleet left
Carthage for Rome. Gaiseric and his nobles expected to clash with the imperial
fleet somewhere at sea. Theough when they sailed along the coast of Italy they
found themselves unopposed and sighted the port of Rome, Ostia, on 31 May 455.
The Romans were already terrified, sending their wives and daughters away to
safety. The gates of Rome couldn't cope with the number of people seeking to
flee. Emperor Maximus had no chance to raise his army in defence of his capital
and decided to ride out of Rome. Unfortunately for him, an angry Roman crowd
recognised him and stoned him to death. This emperor had reigned for just 70
days. Three days after Maximus' death, unopposed, King Gaiseric stepped ashore
at Ostia
For the fourth time in less than
half a century, a barbarian stood at the gates of Rome. Fearing for the safety
of Rome, Pope Leo I decided to speak with the leader of the barbarians on the
behalf of his city. He was met by King Gaiseric and persuaded him not to burn
and slaughter. Gaiseric decided to give certain promises: there would be no
killing, no torturing to discover the location of hidden treasure and no
destruction of buildings, public or private. On these terms the gates of Rome
were wide open to him allowing him to enter teh city with no ressistance. The
Vandals plundered for two weeks. While Gaiseric stayed at the Imperial palace,
his men took all the treasures, statues, Solomon’s Temple (menorab), even
part of the gilded roof of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus was removed. Yet
his greatest prize were Empress Eudoxia, her two daughters, Eudocia and
Placidia, and Gaudentius, the son of Aetius. Everything was carted to Ostia,
loaded into the waiting ships, from where he and his men departed in good order
and sailed back to their stronghold in North Africa. The people of Rome and its
buildings were left unharmed (if indeed this story was true).
Life at Home
According to one book,
Gaiseric’s position among his own people was unassailable. His
overwhelming success encouraged autocratic power. As did a conspiracy among
some Vandal lords, which was bloodily suppressed. In response, Gaiseric
favoured government in which officials replaced the old tribal aristocracy, by
his patronage and not their birth right. This allowed Gaiseric to employ the
talents of Romans and non-Vandals. Later, he passed a law in which succession
to his throne was restricted to the royal family and not subjects to the ancient
Germanic custom of election. Such was his authority that Gaiseric’s will
was accepted with little struggle.
According to Procopius in the
same book, Gaiseric organised his warriors into 80 companies commanded by captains
called chiliarchs, which means leaders of 1,000. Most of them were Vandals and
Alans but increasingly, as time passed and many of them retired to the good
life, some black Moorish tribesmen filled in. They were used as seaborne
raiding partiese while the Vandals waited in the galleys for the spoils to be
brought up. The Moorish kingdoms gave Gaiseric few problems, “Gaiseric
arms my own flesh against me” Sidonius wrote a poem, “I am being
cruelly torn under his authority by the prowess of my own”.
Each year after the sacking of
Rome, the Vandals and allies continued to return to Sicily and the coasts of
southern Italy for more plunder. A new emperor Avitus, unable to stop them
doing this, appealed to Constantinople for help but would not trust General
Aspar, as his old relations with Gaiseric, as an Alan and an Arian. He instead
decided to call General Ricimer, half Suevian half Goth, for help. Ricimer had
a couple of successes against the Vandal fleets but still proved unable to end
the Vandal raids.
Majorian’s North African Expedition
Majorian was born early in the
fifth century. His grandfather had served Emperor Theodosius I as 'Master of
Soldiers’ and his father had been treasurer to Aetius. He was officer to
Aetius but later was dismissed by Aetius due to his wife’s dislike of
him. He became emperor of the western Empire in April 457. First he suffered
conflicts with his rival Romans and the Goths in Gaul. After he gained control
of teh situation he felt able to deal with the Vandals who still raided the
western Mediterranean from their stronghold in North Africa.
First, he drove the Vandal
raiding force out of Campania in Italy in circa AD 459. Then he organised the
building of a great fleet and the recruiting of a mighty army. In France, he
obtained recognition from the Visigoths and Burgundians, many of whom joined
the Suevi, Huns, Alans and other barbarians forming his army. In AD 460, he
marched the army to Carthago Nova (Cartagena) in Spain. Realising the imperial
army and fleet too strong for the Vandals, Gaiseric gained information of
Majorian's movements. He suggested a treaty, but emperor Majorian refused.
Gaiseric decided to instruct his Moorish warriors to lay waste Mauretania and
poison the wells in order to hinder the Roman army advance. Majorian’s
fleet was being prepared to lead an offensive but the Vandals captured them in
their port by a surprise. With both advances on land and sea devastated,
Marjorian was forced into peace talks and into recognising Gaiseric as king of
North Africa and confirming his mastery over the western Mediterranean.
With the expedition a failure,
Ricimer the head of the military was furious and saw his emperor dealing with
Gaiseric as shameful. And so Ricimer, who had nominated Marjorian as western
Emperor, now turned against him. Marjorian was captured in the mutiny (likely
being set up by Ricimer). He was to end his reign in AD 461, either by illness
or murder.
Raids continue
The accession of a new western
emperor in AD 461 gave Gaiseric the excuse to break all previous treaties and
resume his raiding of Sicily and Italy. The Vandals planned their attacks well,
ensuring there were never any Roman troops or navies present. Meanwhile the
Romans could not possible be everywhere at the same time. Every year, the Vandals
grew ever more daring and ever more rapacious. Sardinia, Corsica and the
Balearic Islands all fell into Gaiseric’ hands.
Great Expedition of 468
In 468, emperor Leo decided to
end the Vandal raiding by launching an expedition to crush them. It was the
most expensive expedition ever in history. Thought is was a failure and brought
about the end of western Roman empire 8 years later.
A) Outrages
By AD 467 Gaiseric and his raiders went too far. It might not have been his
fault, but the greedy actions of a rogue Vandal pirate. A raid on southern
Greece violated territory of the Eastern Empire. Eastern emperor Leo was
outraged. He decided to join forces with the western empire against the
Vandals, by nominating Anthemius as western emperor. First Anthemius had to
ally himself with Ricimer by marrying his daughter Alypia to him. He also made
himself popular in Rome as he brought about the end of the hostilities between
the eastern and western empire.
B) Spending on Expedition
Poor emperor Leo had to pour
C) Commanders
Regarding who should be at the head of the expedition, Leo was persuaded by his
wife and General Aspar to put General Basiliscus in charge, the brother of
Leo’s wife. In AD 468, the fleet sailed from Constantinople into
Mediterranean Sea and was joined by the Italian fleet under Marcellinus.
Ricimer was angered that the western emperor Anthemius had chosen Marcellinus
as the commander of the western fleet for he was Ricimer’s foremost
enemy. General Heracleius of eastern army obtained auxiliaries in Egypt and
then sailed for Tripoli where he would disembark and march by land to Carthage.
D) Battle on Land and Sea
Alerted by the Vandal scouts of the empire’s movements, Gaiseric decided
to repulse them by using his Vandal fleets. However Marcellinus’ western
fleet succeeded in Sardinia over the Vandal fleet and took control of this
island. About over 500 Vandal galleys confronted Basiliscus’ fleet in the
Sicilian waters. This battle, too, ended with a major victory for Basiliscus,
Gaiseric losing 340 galleys.
Set sea battles were rare in the
5th century and something that Vandals avoided whenever possible. The classic
ram and board warfare of the ancient Mediterranean still pertained. But greater
emphasis was placed on firepower, as the proliferation of cataphract-type ships
suggests. A hail of archery preceded any encounter. To this was added the shot
of catapults and ballistae, their stones and iron weights were intended to hole
a galley. I'm not sure if there was widespread use of Greek Fire in the 5th
century, a feared Byzantine weapon. Like Carthaginian General Hannibal Barca
using clay pots of snakes, both side using clay pots of quicklime, serpents and
scorpions to throw into enemy galley to panic them.
Heracleius landed with a considerable force in Tripoli, confronting a Vandal
army along the Libyan coast. The Vandal warriors in Gaiseric’s army were
all quality horsemen who fought with sword and spear when in close combat.
Their Moorish allies in the centre, rose on camel back and if the fighting was
to be an aggressive, skirmishing attack, they remained in the saddle. It was
advantage to the Moors to stand in a phalanx in which they stood with spears, javelin,
and shields amid the legs of their animals, enemy horsemen unfamiliar with the
sight and smell of Moorish camels could be thrown into disorder. They marched
against Heracleius but his army, which included Hun horse-archers, were little
effected. Moorish javelin showers, the camel phalanx and the powerful Vandal
horsemen failed to break Heracleius’ advance. This allowed Heracleius to
captures several towns and to confidently continue his march towards Carthage.
E) Three Roman columns close in
on King Gaiseric
Gaiseric was at his palace fearing for his own survival as well as for that of
his kingdom as all the three enemy forces closed in on him. However the Vandal
scouts informed him of Basiliscus and his fleet being anchored at the
Promontorium Mercurii, now Cape Bon, not far from Carthage (
F) The Gaiseric Design
Gaiseric spent the five days preparing his old war galleys, filling them with
brushwood and pots of oil. On the fifth day they were ready, waiting for dark
to come. When the wind rose and the moon was obscured by cloud, the old galleys
were towed out. Against the black sky, the Vandals reached the Cape Bon and
started to fire the galleys. Roman guards observed fire darting to and from
ships. Too late the alarm was sounded. The fire galleys sailed into the pack of
imperial ships which was too crowded, leaving no room for ships to manouvre.
The flagship where Basilsicus stayed at was well away from danger. The wind
drove the fire ships into the Roman fleet, throwing it into confusion. The
noise of the wind and the crackling flames was mingled with the cries of the
soldiers and sailors as they shouted commands to one another, using long poles
to push off the fire galleys as well as each other's galleys. The Vandal fleet
were behind the advancing fire galleys. They rammed the imperial galleys and
sinking them. But there was some brave Romans in this struggle, including
General John, who was a general under Basiliscus. When his ship was surrounded
by the Vandals and was being boarded, he stood on the deck and, turning from
side to side kept, killing heaps of the enemy. Finally once his ship was
captured; he assured that much of the valuable Roman equipment had been thrown
into the sea. Genzon, the son of Gaiseric boarded John's ship. He offered a
promise of safety, but John refused to fall into the hands of dogs and threw
himself into the sea wearing his armour. The galleys of the roman fleet burned
throughout the night.
By morning, Basiliscus had lost
more than half his fleet that anchored off Cape Bon. The surviving galleys
sailed back to Sicily, harassed all the way by Moorish pirates. Another
imperial fleet under Marcellinus who was at Sardinia might have saved the
situation. But Marcellinus was assassinated by either a Vandal agent or a plot
by Ricimer. Any further expeditions against Vandal kingdom were abandoned, the
army of Heracleius heard the bad news and decided to march back. The empire's
campaign was a completed disaster and Gaiseric was the strong man of the
Mediterranean.
General Basiliscus at St Sophia
Emperor Leo was shocked that the
expedition was not successful. A fleet after all, whose costs would keep the
Empire near bankrupcy for many years. The public was outraged and Basiliscus
was forced to seek sanctuary in the church of St Sophia in Constantinople, the
capital of eastern Roman empire. Leo blamed him for the failure to destroy the
enemy kingdom and the loss of so many fine Roman soldiers and sailors. General
Aspar was an Alan and Arian and may have secretly sided with his fellow-Arian
Gaiseric, who was after all king of the Vandals and Alans. If this was true,
then Aspar may have helped Gaiseric by bribing Basiliscus to betray his emperor
on his expedition. However there is no evidence.
Gaiseric’s Old Age
The early AD 470’s saw some
major changes within the imperial hierarchy. Aspar was murdered by emperor Leo.
Next year, Ricimer died, the following year emperor Leo died. The Vandals still
were raiding the coasts of Italian and Greece as Gaiseric was angered over
Aspar’s family being wiped out, revealing the special relationship they
enjoyed. The new emperor Zeno tried to end the Vandal War by negotiating. His
embassador, Severus, met with surprising success at Carthage. Used to buying
the services of imperial agents, Gaiseric presented him with rich gifts and
money but Severus refused. “In place of such things, the reward most
worthwhile for an ambassador is the redemption of prisoners”. Malchus
records that Gaiseric acquiesced. “Whatever prisoners I, along with my
sons, have obtained, I hand over to you. As for the rest who have been shared
out among my followers, you are at liberty to buy them back from each owner,
but even I would unable to compel their captors to do this against their
will”
In addition to the freedom of
prisoners, Severus wanted to end the cruelty to Catholics. Gaiseric appears to
have wanted to impress the rest of the Mediterranean with his tolerance and
civilisation. Emperor Zeno recognised the full extent of the Vandal kingdom,
including all of western Africa, the Balearic Islands, Corsica, Sardinia and
Sicily, ensuring an end to the raids on the empire.
During the long reign of
Gaiseric, the western Roman empire broke up into numerous Germanic kingdoms.
Many different emperors had held the throne in both west and east. He had
outlived all the great warlords: Aetius, Attila, Theoderic, Ricimer and Aspar.
He witnessed the deposition of the last emperor of the western Roman empire.
The following year, Gaiseric, in his advance old age, died a natural death on
25th January 477, aged either 77 or 87, forty-eight years after landing in
Africa.
Huneric, The Vandal King AD 477-484
His son, Huneric, succeeded
Gaiseric. Huneric would not keep his great kingdom together. The Moors
revolted. No one could command the respect Gaiseric had won.
Huneric had problems with the different churches, Arian and Catholic. He
resolved to suppress Manichaeism at the start of his reign, but backed down
upon finding many Manichaeeans among the Arian clergy. At the request of
emperor Zeno, Huneric , owing to his fear of Constantinople, allowed the
election of a Catholic Bishop of Carthage in AD 481, named Eugenius. Eugenius
was wise and popular, and attracted not only Catholics but also many Vandals,
which alarmed Huneric.
Gunthamund, The Vandal King AD 484-496
Huneric died and was succeeded by
his nephew Gunthamund (though he had desired his son to rule). Under his reign
the Catholics were free from molestation from government. He also restored the
Basilica of St Agileus, a Catholic.
Hilderich, The Vandal King AD 523-530
Gundthamund died and was
succeeded by his brother Thrasamund, who at first sought to bring the Catholics
into line with Arianism through gifts and persuasion. But as this did not work
he resorted to threats and torture. He deported 120 bishops to Sardinia. At
times though he feared an invasion by Theodoric the Great, the Ostrogothic
King, who now controlled Italy.
Thrasamund, The Vandal King AD 496-523
After the death of Thrasamund, a
great grandson of Gaiseric and mildly homosexual bachelor named Hilderich
became king of the Vandals. He favoured the Catholics and granted religious
freedom. He recalled the exiled bishops, one of whom was Fulgentius, an
important leader monastic houses, but only sixty bishops could be mustered. For
the next seven years, the church underwent a process of reorganisation. There
was a revolution in the palace and threatened to bring back the days of
persecution. His cousin Gelimer, who raised the banner of national Arianism,
opposed King Hilderich’s policy. Gelimer had won several victories
against the Berbers (Moors) in the south. He was supported by most of the
Vandal nobility seized the throne for himself. Hilderich was put into prison
cell along with his few supporters; his children perhaps were granted refuge at
the court of Constantinople. From prison Hilderich appealed to emperor
Justinian for help.
Gelimer, The Vandal King AD 530-34
Eastern emperor Justinian the
Great, had hoped to bring the Vandal Kingdom back into the imperial fold
without the loss of a single Roman soldier. As King Hilderich was a Roman on
his mother’s side: Princess Eudocia, daughter of Valentinian III, who had
been brought back to Africa with her mother and sister after the Vandal sack of
Rome. Hilderich had so far adopted Roman ways as to renounce the Arian heresy
of his forefathers and embrace the orthodox faith. Gelimer finally lost
patience and had put Hilderich in prison, replyed to Justinian the
Great’s immediate protest with a letter pointing out that “nothing
was more desirable than that a monarch should mind his own business.”
Peace with Persians
The eastern Roman empire had
negotiated an end to the war with the Persians and kept the Germanic and Slavic
tribes in the north in check. Emperor Justinian the Great was free to deal with
Gelimer and his kingdom. Justinian the Great wanted North Africa to be
reconquered from the Vandals. First he had to find a right person –
finally he found a young General Belisarius from Thrace who had had several
successes in the war with the Persians, including a victory at Dara. He could
be trusted to command an expedition to North Africa.
Justinian the Great’s
advisers, including John of Cappadocia, warned against launching an expedition
to North Africa, fearing a repeat of Emperor Leo’s failed expedition 65
years earlier and the huge drain it represented on the imperial treasury. The
invasion fleet would be sailing over
Departures
On about Midsummer Day 533,
Justinian the Great stood at the window of his palace to watch the departure of
the expedition under Belisarius. They travelled in a fleet of 500 transports
with support by 92 dromons (the smallest type of eastern warship, designed for lightness
and speed). The fleet carried 10,000 infantry which was collected from the
eastern frontier, together with 5,000 trained cavalry, including 600 Huns and
400 Heruls (Germanic tribe), all mounted horse archers. On the flagship was
along with his military secretary Procopius and his wife Antonina.
Belisarius hanged two drunken
Huns on the hill above Abydos for murdering one of their comrades. Disaster
struck when 500 men were poisoned from the sacks of biscuit provided by John of
Cappadocia, which were found to be mouldy. Finally they arrived at Sicily, once
ruled by the Vandals but bought from Gaiseric by King Odoacer of Italy some 60
years ago in return for an annual subsidy (it was a total mistake for the
Vandals to give this island to Odoacer). Sicily was now controlled by the
Ostrogoths, who had conquered Italy from Odoacer under their King Theodoric.
The Ostrogoths were friendly with Belisarius and his army, providing a useful
vantage-point from which Belisarius could prepare his fleet for the final
attack. Procopius was sent south to Syracuse, where he accidentally ran into an
old boyhood friend, a slave who had returned only three days earlier from
Carthage.
Gave Orders to Sail
Procopius took his old friend to
see Belisarius to report some unbelievable news. The slave told King Gelimer
had indeed recently sent his major expedition of over 120 ships carrying 5,000
Vandals under his brother Tzazo to put down a rising in Sardinia, a Vandal
province. Gelimer still not yet heard anything of the approaching imperial
fleet. Belisarius decided to sail at once via Malta. When they reached the
coast of North Africa somewhere in south of Carthage he held a council of war
with his generals, if one should land the army along the coast or if one shoudl
sail directly into the port of Carthage. It was decided to disambark the army
on dry land rather than to sail into Carthage port, as they didn't know the
Vandal fleet’s location. They landed at Caput Vada, modern Ras Kaboudia
in Tunisia and found suuprt there by people who were opposed to rule by the
Vandals. The cavalry and the infantry set off to the north towards Carthage,
over
The Battle of Ad Decium (near Tenth
Milestone)
Once the Roman fleet had been
sighted off the coast and then landed Vandal territory, Gelimer knew himself in
trouble with part of his army and fleet away in Sardinia and the Roman’s
marching on Carthage. He needed to wait for his brother to return from
Sardinia, but he had only two options: abandon Carthage or offer a battle. He
ordered his cousin Hilderick, an old king who was in prison to be killed and
acted quickly organising his available army at home. The number of his army was
much large than that of Belisarius’ (over 30,000 Vandals compared to
about 16,000 Romans/allies).
Gelimer chose a place at the
tenth Milestone for the confrontation. He divided his main army into three
groups: his brother Ammatas would attack the vanguard, his nephew Gibamund with
2,000 men would attack the Roman left flank via a salt plain and he himself
with his main army would fall upon Belisarius’ rear by far marching around
the Roman left. His plans seemed to be working, unfortunately for him, his
communications let him down.
Ammatas moved too early,
Belisarius was informed about the enemy’s movement and so was allowed to
wait for the advance of Ammatas with his few men. Ammatas and his men ran into
the vanguard, he was killed after he had accounted for a dozen Romans. His men
saw their leader fall, lost heart and fled toward Carthage leaving half the
force to be cut to pieces around him.
The flanking attack was no more successful.
If Gibamund had moved in quickly enough to the assistance of Ammatas, the two
divisions might yet have saved the day. But Gibamund at the salt plain met Huns
and Romans who outnumbered him at a ratio of 3:1 and was killed.
Gelimer with his main army
advanced at Belisarius’ rear. Roman and Hun cavalry rode to meet the
Vandals, Gelimer ordered a halt and began carefully drawing up his army in the
line of battle before facing the enemy cavalry. The Vandals won as the Roman
and Hun cavalry were in disorder and rode back to the main force. Belisarius
feared for his main force, as Gelimer would have won by riding through the
Roman force and killing them before heading for Carthage. Gelimer started well,
somehow contriving to cut Belisarius and his generals off from the main army,
but Gelimer got upset by noticing the dead body of his brother Ammatas and the
fight went out of him. He remained motionless, refusing to leave the spot until
the corpse had been carried from the field and arrangements made for it’s
proper burial. Belisarius saw his chance and took advantage leading his main
army down upon the Vandals at the right and left sides. This battle was over,
the Vandals fled westward into the deserts of Numidia as a path to Carthage was
blocked by the Romans. Carthage lay open to Belisarius and his army.
Carthage opens its Gates
The day after the battle,
Belisarius marched on Carthage. He ordered his army not to camp outside the
city walls, suspecting a Vandal trap. Before entering the city, he ordered his
army not to kill or enslave any of the people of Carthage, as they were Roman
citizens under the Vandal tyranny for a century. Carthage now in
Belisarius’ hand, many citizens welcomed him and his army as they entered
through the wide-open gates. Carthage became a Roman city again for the first
time in nearly a century. He went straight to the palace where he sat on the
throne of the Vandal King. He set to rebuilding the fortifications of the city,
and his fleet sought shelter in the lake of Tunis five miles south of Carthage.
The Battle of Ticameron
Gelimer sought not to struggle on
alone from his temporary refuge at Bulla Regia in Numidia, some hundred miles
west of Carthage. He sent an urgent message to his brother Tzazo who was still
on his Sardinian expedition with his army. Victorious Tzazo received the bad
news and rushed back to North Africa to reunite with the Gelimer and his
forces. Gelimer settled down to reorganise and regroup his own army and called
to his aid local Punic and Berber tribes. He offered them generous rewards for
every Roman head that they could lay before him. He sent his secret agents into
Carthage to persuade the Huns and some citizens who were fellow-Arians to
transfer their allegiance, to betray Belisarius. When Tzazo and his army joined
Gelimer early in December AD 533 he felt himself strong enough once more to
take the offensive. He ordered his army to ready itself to march out of Bulla
toward Carthage. With the two brothers at the head of the army, the Vandal
force paused on the way to demolish the great aqueduct on which the capital
chiefly depended for it’s water supply.
Belisarius had spent the weeks
since the Battle of Ad Decium strengthening the city defences, he did not want
to face a siege and he was beginning to grow suspecious of the loyalty of the
Huns and other barbarians under his command, knowing some of his army was being
approached by agents of Gelimer. He gave the order to march to meet the Vandals
in battle putting the Huns and barbarians in the rear of his force.
The battle was fought on 15th
December AD 533. Belisarius places the Roman cavalry in the first line and the
infantry formed the second line. Immediately the Roman cavalry charged three
times into the thick of the Vandals ranks: hand to hand fighting. In the third
charge, Tzazo was cut down in front of Gelimer, who lost heart. The Vandal
lines began to retreat in a rout. Gelimer fled back into Numidia, his army
pell-mell after him. The battle was over, the Vandals having lost over 3,000,
either killed or taken prisoner. Belisarius marched on the city of Hippo, which
opened its gates to him at once.
Gelimer was aware that his
kingdom was lost but did not at first surrender. He planned instead to
transport his part of Vandal treasure and surviving supporters to Visigothic
Spain where he would seek refuge. In Spain were some long lost Vandal cousins,
descendents of those who had remained in the south of Spain when King Gaiseric
led the big migration of his people to North Africa a century earlier.
But the Romans intercepted Gelimer, who lost his treasure and fled into the
mountains, sheltered by Berber tribesmen. The year after he was found and
surrounded by a Roman force under commander Pharas the Herulian who urged him
to give up. Gelimer received emperor Justinian's word that the Romans would
treat Gelimer as a king and would arrange for him a dignified and comfortable
retirement. But he refused and asked to be sent a sponge and a loaf of bread.
In the book I read, it doesn't say whether his wishes were granted or not. In
March, after a long and extremely disagreeable winter, Gelimer finally
surrendered to Belisarius at Mount Papua. The Vandal Kingdom was at an end in
North Africa. The Vandal provinces of Sardinia, Corsica and the Balearic
Islands were returned to Eastern Roman Empire without a fight.
Triumph
After Belisarius had loaded all
captured treasure and Vandal prisoners aboard his fleet, he returned to Carthage,
from where he was recalled by emperor Justinian to Constantinople as Justinian
feared he might make himself king of Africa. Belisarius' fleet carried all
prisoners, treasure as well as the chained Gelimer back to Constantinople. The
people of the great city greeted general Belisarius as he led his army and
allies into the Hippodrome, followed by Gelimer, his family and all the tallest
and best looking Vandal prisoners. Waggons that carried the spoils of war
including the menorab, that sacred seven-branched candle stick that had been
brought to Rome by Emperor Titus in AD 71 from the Temple of Jerusalem and
which had then been taken to Carthage by King Gaiseric nearly a century ago.
Gelimer, The last King of the Vandals
Gelimer was led into the Hippodrome
in chains to the cheers of Roman citizens where he saw an emperor seated on a
throne at the end of Hippodrome. “Vanity of vanities, all is
vanity” the last King of the Vandals is said to have murmured as he
grovelled in the dust beside his conqueror. He refused the offer Patrician rank
for which he would have to abandon his Arian faith. He accepted
Justinian’s offer of rich estates in Galatia where he and his family were
to spend their lives in safety, free to worship as they liked. Over 2,000
Vandal prisoners were less fortunate and were formed into five imperial
regiments known as the Vandali Justiniani. They were marched off to the Persian
front to fight for Justinian’s empire and to survive as best they could.
The surviving Vandals continued
to live in North Africa under Roman rule, some escaped to Visigothic Spain.
UNDEFEATED, KING GAISERIC CREATED
THE VANDAL KINGDOM OF NORTH AFRICA.
Web sites links
Suggested Reading
BYZANTIUM the Early Centuries,
John Julius Norwich
ISBN 01401.14475
MEDIEVAL WARLORD (green hardbook
with a picture of barbarian in the front cover)
I could not find what’s the ISBN # or name of writer, sorry
Spain
Profile
|
Official name |
Reino de
España (Kingdom of Spain) |
|
Form of government |
constitutional
monarchy with two legislative houses (Senate [2641]; Congress of Deputies
[350]) |
|
Chief of state |
King |
|
Head of government |
Prime
Minister |
|
Capital |
Madrid |
|
Official language |
Castilian
Spanish2 |
|
Official religion |
none |
|
Monetary unit |
euro
(€) |
|
Population estimate |
(2008)
45,661,000 |
|
Total area (sq mi) |
195,364 |
|
Total area (sq km) |
505,990 |
|
1Includes 56
indirectly elected seats. 2The constitution
states that “Castilian is the Spanish official language of the
State,” but that “all other Spanish languages (including Euskera [Basque],
Catalan, and Galician) will also be official in the corresponding Autonomous
Communities.” |
|
History » Visigothic
Spain to c. 500
Roman rule in Spain, and elsewhere in the
Western Empire, was undermined during the 5th century by the migrations of Germanic tribes that had settled along the
Roman frontier and that came under pressure from expansion by the Huns. One such group,
subsequently known as theVisigoths, a people that lived
along the Danube River and converted toArian Christianity, was authorized by the
emperor Valens to settle in the empire in 376.
Mistreatment by local officials and the failue of the empire to uphold its end
of the bargain caused the Goths to revolt. In the subsequent Battle of Adrianople in 378, Valens was killed and his
armies were destroyed by the Goths. Despite the extent of their victory, the
Goths came to terms with the emperor Theodosius I and settled in the empire as foederati (“federated allies”).
Theodosius’s heirs, however, were less successful at containing the
various Germanic peoples that had moved into the empire. In 406
the Ostrogoths attempted to invade Italy, and the efforts to stop them allowed
the Vandals, Alans, and Suebi(Suevi) to enter Gaul and then Spain. After ravaging the country for
two years, the Suebi and the Asding Vandals settled in the northwestern province
of Galicia (Gallaecia). The Siling Vandals occupied Baetica in the south, and the
Alans, an Iranian people, settled in the central provinces of Lusitania and
Carthaginiensis. For the time being, only Tarraconensis remained entirely under
Roman control.
The Visigoths also posed difficulties
for Theosodius’s heirs. The new king, Alaric, rose in rebellion soon
after the death of the emperor in 395 but was kept in check by the general Stilicho. Rome’s failure to
make concessions to Alaric and the massacre of barbarian soldiers in the
imperial army following Stilicho’s execution in 408 led to Alaric’s
invasion of Italy and sack of Rome in 410, which sent shock waves throughout
the empire. Alaric died soon after, however, and was succeeded by Athaulf, who moved into southern
Gaul. Failing to win recognition for his people as foederati,
or allies, of the empire, he was forced into Tarraconensis, where he was
assassinated in 415. Under his successor, Wallia (415–418), the Romans acknowledged the
Visigoths as allies and encouraged them to campaign against the other barbarian
tribes in the peninsula. Those Alans and Siling Vandals who survived Visigothic
attacks sought refuge with the Asdings and the Suebi in Galicia. In 418 the
Roman emperor Honorius authorized the Visigoths to settle in
Gaul in the provinces of Aquitania Secunda and Narbonensis.
The Suebi and the Asding Vandals
meanwhile continued to lay waste to Spain. Led by King Gaiseric (Genseric), the Vandals crossed the Strait of Gibraltar into North Africa in 429. They subjugated that province
and governed it and the Balearic Islands until the Byzantine reconquest in
The Visigoths, as allies of Rome, aided
in the defense of Gaul againstAttila and the Huns. However, the unchecked
deterioration of the Western Empire resulted in the rupture of the fragile
alliance between Rome and the Visigoths. Under the rulership of Euric (466–484), the Visigoths founded
an independent kingdom in southern Gaul, centred at Toulouse. In Spain the
Visigoths drove the Suebi back into Galicia and occupied Tarraconensis and part
of Lusitania. For the moment the provinces of Baetica and Carthaginiensis were
left to take care of themselves.
Despite the collapse of imperial rule
in Spain, Roman influence remained strong. The majority of the population,
probably about six million, wereHispano-Romans,
as compared with 200,000 barbarians. Hispano-Romans held many administrative
positions and continued to be governed by Roman law embodied in the Theodosian Code.
The Codex Euricianus (“Code of Euric”), which
was completed in 475 or 483 or under Euric’s son a generation later, was
written in Latin and designed as the personal law of the Visigoths. It also addressed
relations between Euric’s Roman and Visigothic subjects. In 506
Euric’s son Alaric II (484–507) published a legal code,
known as the Breviarium Alariciarum (“Breviary of Alaric”)
or the Lex Romana Visigothorum (“Roman Law of the
Visigoths”), which was based on the Theodosian Code and meant to serve
the needs of the Roman population.
Visigothic dominance over southern Gaul
came to an end when Clovis Iand the Franks defeated Alaric II at Vouillé
in 507. As a consequence of Frankish expansion, the Visigoths were compelled to
penetrate more deeply into Spain, where their kings eventually established
themselves atToledo (Toletum). Meanwhile, as part of his
effort to reconquer the Western Empire, the Byzantine emperor Justinian took advantage of struggles among the
barbarians to regain control of the southern and eastern coasts of Spain. For
about 70 years the Byzantines maintained a foothold in that part of the
peninsula.
Although the Visigoths had been in
contact with the Roman world for more than a century before their effective
settlement in Spain and had acquired a veneer of Romanization, significant
legal, cultural, social, and religious differences kept them apart from the
Hispano-Roman population. Aside from different languages and disparities in education,
these diverse peoples were subject to distinct bodies of law. Although the
Visigoths were Christian, they held to the Arian heresy against the Roman
Catholic Christianity of the Hispano-Romans. The Visigothic king was
theoretically ruler of only his own people, whereas the Hispano-Romans
continued to profess allegiance to a rapidly vanishing imperial authority. A
Roman law that prohibited intermarriage between the two peoples was, however,
abolished in the late 6th century. Still, the task of bringing the two peoples
together and of achieving some sort of political and cultural unity was a
formidable one.
History » The
Visigothic kingdom
The Hispano-Roman population did not
easily absorb the Visigoths. Because the Suebi maintained an independent
kingdom in Galicia and the Basques steadfastly opposed all attempts at
subjugation, the Visigoths did not control the entire peninsula. To the great
satisfaction of the Hispano-Romans, Byzantine authority was restored in the
southeast early in the 6th century. However, in the second half of the centuryLeovigild (568–586), the most effective of
the Visigothic monarchs, advanced the unification of the peninsula by
conquering the Suebi and subduing the Basques. Ruling from Toledo in the centre
of the peninsula, he transformed Visigothic kingship by adopting the throne and
other Roman symbols of monarchy. A committed Arian Christian, Leovigild sought
to unify the kingdom by encouraging conversion of the Catholic Hispano-Roman
population to his faith. Despite his efforts to bring the Arian faith more in
line with Catholic teaching and his emphasis on conversion rather than
compulsion, Leovigild’s attempt was ultimately unsuccessful and may have
contributed to the failed revolt of his sonHermenegild (later St. Hermenegild), who had
accepted Roman Catholicism and hoped, perhaps, to become king.
Hermenegild’s rebellion, however, may have been incidental to his
conversion, and Leovigild’s policy of uniting this people through
religion would be vindicated by his other son, Reccared.
Recognizing that the majority of the
people adhered to the Catholic faith,Reccared (586–601) repudiated his
father’s religion and announced his conversion to Catholicism. As the
Gothic nobles and bishops followed his lead, a principal obstacle to the
assimilation of Visigoths and Hispano-Romans was lifted. Thereafter, the
Hispano-Romans, no longer expecting deliverance by Byzantium, developed a firm
allegiance to the Visigothic monarchy. As a consequence, Swinthila
(621–631) was able to conquer the remaining Byzantine fortresses in the
peninsula and to extend Visigothic authority throughout Spain.
Not only was the conversion of the
Visigoths a sign of the predominance of Hispano-Roman civilization, but it also
brought the bishops into a close relationship with the monarchy. Indeed, both
Hermenegild and Reccared had close ties with St. Leander of Sevilla, who was
involved with their conversions and was the brother of the encyclopaedist
Isidore. Kings, imitating Byzantine practice, exercised the right to appoint
bishops, the natural leaders of the Hispano-Roman majority, and to summon them
to the Councils of Toledo.
Although the Councils of Toledo were essentially ecclesiastical assemblies,
they had an exceptional impact on the government of the realm. The bishops,
once they had heard a royal statement concerning current issues, enacted canons
relating to church affairs, but they also touched on secular problems, such as
royal elections or cases of treason. Through their councils the bishops
provided essential support for the monarchy, but, in striving to achieve a
peaceful and harmonious public order, the bishops sometimes compromised their
independence.
The hostility of the nobility to
hereditary succession and an absence of natural heirs tended to preserve the
elective character of the monarchy. Because the Visigoths had a reputation for
assassinating their kings, the bishops tried to safeguard the ruler by means of
an anointmentceremony. The holy oil
manifested to all that the king was under God’s protection and now had a
sacred character. The bishops, hoping to eliminate the violence associated with
a royal election, also devised the procedures to be followed. The royal household (officium
palatinum), which imitated the Roman imperial model, assisted the
king in governing, but when necessary the king also consulted assemblies of
magnates and notables (aula regia).
Dukes, counts, or judges were responsible for the administration of provinces
and other territorial districts surviving from Roman times. Self-government had
long since disappeared in the towns. Agriculture and animal husbandry were the mainstays of the economy.
Evidence suggests that commercial and industrial activity were minimal.
The predominance of the law of the
Hispano-Roman majority over that of the Visigoths was another manifestation of
the ascendancy of Roman civilization. The form and content of the Liber Judiciorum,
a code of law promulgated about 654 by the Visigothic king Recceswinth (649–672), was fundamentally
Roman. Although Germanic elements (such as the test of
innocence by the ordeal of cold water) were included, the code consistently
accepted the principles of Roman law, and, unlike Germaniccustomary law,
it was meant to have territorial rather than personal application. The Liber
Judiciorum was a principal part of the Visigothic legacy received by medieval
Spain.
The extraordinary cultural achievements
of the 7th century also testify to the continuing impact of the Roman heritage.
The most prolific author was St. Isidore, bishop of Sevilla
(Hispalis) from about 600 to
Toward the end of the 7th century, a
critical time in Visigothic history began. The deposition, through deception,
of King Wamba
(672–680), a capable ruler who tried to reform the military organization,
was a portent of future problems. As agitation continued, Wamba’s
successors made scapegoats of the Jews, compelling them to accept the Christian
religion and threatening them with slavery. After the death of Witiza (700–710), the persistent
turbulence of the nobility thwarted the succession of his son and allowed Roderick, duke of Baetica
(710–711), to claim the throne. Determined to oust Roderick,
Witiza’s family apparently summoned theMuslims in North Africa to their aid.
Subsequently, Ṭāriq
ibn Ziyād, the Muslim governor of Tangier, landed at Calpe
(Gibraltar) in 711 and routed King Roderick and the Visigoths near the
Guadalete River on July 19. The triumphant Muslims rapidly overran Spain,
meeting only feeble resistance from the leaderless Visigoths. Although the
kingdom of the Visigoths vanished, its memory inspired the kings of Asturias-León-Castile to begin the reconquest of Spain.
History » Christian Spain from the Muslim invasion to about 1260
Despite
ongoing warfare among its various Christian kingdoms, a recurring theme in
Christian Spain from the Islamic invasion of the 8th century to the coming of
the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, in the late 15th century was the unification
of the Iberian Peninsula under
Christian rule. The Islamic conquest disrupted whatever measure of unity the
Visigoths had achieved and raised new religious, cultural, legal, linguistic,
and ethnic barriers to assimilation with the native population. A number of
tiny Christian states eventually rose from obscurity in the northern mountains
and, prompted by self-preservation and religio-cultural hostility toward Islam,
initiated the Reconquista (Reconquest).
Christian success was in direct proportion to the strength of Islamic Spain at
any given time. When Islamic power waned, the Christians usually advanced their
frontiers. The kings of Asturias-León-Castile, declaring themselves the
heirs of the Visigoths, claimed hegemony over the entire peninsula. However,
the rulers of Portugal, Navarre (Navarra),
and Aragon-Catalonia (Spanish:
Cataluña; Catalan: Catalunya), whose frontiers began to be delineated in
the 11th and 12th centuries, repudiated and often undermined the aspirations of
their larger neighbour. The Reconquista was nearly completed by the middle of
the 13th century, by which time the Muslims retained only the small kingdom of Granada (Arabic:
Gharnāṭah)
in vassalage to Castile until
1492.
The Trastámara dynasty,
which came to power in Castile in the late 14th century, gave a new impetus to
the search for peninsular unity by using marriage, diplomacy, and war to
acquire dominion over the neighbouring Christian kingdoms. At the same time,
the Trastámaras struggled to extend royal power against the resistance
of the nobles. Ferdinand and Isabella linked Aragon and Castile by marriage and
also brought the Reconquista to a conclusion by conquering Granada. However, as
they were unable to incorporate Portugal into a family union by marriage, the
unification of the peninsula was incomplete. The political union of Castile and
Aragon could not by itself, of course, overcome the two realms’
centuries-old diversity of languages, laws, and traditions.
History » Christian Spain from the Muslim
invasion to about 1260 » The
Christian states, 711–1035
Soon after the Islamic invasion,
fleeing Visigothic nobles and the mountaineers of Asturias united under the
leadership of Pelayo (718–737), a Gothic lord, in
opposition to the Muslim forces. Later generations acclaimed Pelayo’s
victory over the Muslims at Covadonga, about 718, as the
beginning of the Reconquista and the “salvation of Spain.” Alfonso I(739–757)
expanded the Asturian kingdom by occupying Galicia after the withdrawal of
rebellious Imazighen garrisoned there. He also created an uninhabited
no-man’s-land between Christian and Islamic Spain by devastating the
Duero River valley to the south. The Basques apparently recovered their
independence in the western Pyrenees, while the Franks drove the Muslims from
Septimania (southwestern France) and moved into northeastern Spain. Although Charlemagne failed to take Zaragoza (Saraqusṭah) in 778, his troops captured Barcelona in 801 and occupiedCatalonia. This region, later
known as the Spanish
March, consisted of several counties under Frankish rule and long maintained
strong political and cultural connections first to the Carolingian empire and then to the kingdom of France. Thus, for several
centuries Catalans looked to the north.
By contrast, the Asturians turned to
the south. After advancing his chief seat to Oviedo, Alfonso II (791–842) attempted to recreate
Visigothic institutions. In the late 9th century Alfonso III (866–910) took advantage of
internal dissension in Islamic Spain to plunder enemy territory and to seize
notable strongholds such as Porto. He also initiated the repopulation of the
lands reaching southward to the Duero that had been deserted for about a
century. His construction of numerous castles to defend his eastern frontier
against Muslim assaults gave that area its distinctive character and thus its
name, Castile. During this time the earliest known Christian chronicles of the
Reconquista were written, and they deliberately tried to demonstrate the
historical connection between the Visigothic and Asturian monarchies.
Portraying themselves as the legitimate heirs of Visigothic authority and
tradition, the Asturians self-consciously declared their responsibility for the
Reconquista of Islamic Spain.
However, Asturian leadership did not go
unchallenged: King Sancho I Garcés (905–926) began to forge a strong
Basque kingdom with its centre at Pamplona in Navarre, and Count Wilfred
of Barcelona (873–898)—whose descendants were to govern Catalonia
until the 15th century—asserted his independence from the Franks by
extending his rule over several small Catalan counties.
The apparent weakness of Islamic Spain
and the growth of the Asturian kingdom encouraged García I (910–914) to transfer the seat
of his power from Oviedo southward to the city of León. Nevertheless,
any expectation that Islamic rule was set to end was premature. During the 10th
century the caliphs of Cordóba (Qurṭabah)
not only restored order and unity in Islamic Spain but also renewed their raids
on the Christian north. Although the Christians suffered great destruction, they
occasionally won some victories. The triumph of Ramiro II (931–951) over the great caliphʿAbd
al-Raḥmān III at Simancas in 939 was extraordinary,
but within his own dominions Ramiro encountered increasing hostility from the
Castilians. As a frontier people hardened by exposure to the dangers of daily
Islamic raids, they were disinclined to bow to Leonese tradition and law. Fernán González (c. 930–970), the count of Castile,
defied Ramiro and established the foundations for the later independence of
Castile.
With Islamic power steadily increasing
in the later 10th century, the Christians suffered a corresponding decline.
When ambassadors representing Ramiro III of León (966–984), Sancho II Garcés of Navarre (970–994), Count
Borrell II of Barcelona (c. 940–992), and García
Fernández, count of Castile (970–995), pledged homage and paid
tribute to the caliph at Cordóba, the abject status of the Christian
rulers was manifest for all to see. Yet, despite their acknowledgement of
Islamic hegemony, the Leonese kings, adhering to Asturian custom, continued to
assert their rights as heirs to the Visigothic tradition. Their claim to
domination over the entire peninsula was now expressed in the idea of a Hispanic empire centred at León. As the century drew
to a close, the imperial idea surely offered some comfort when Abū
ʿĀmir al-Manṣūr(Almanzor), who exercised
dictatorial authority in the caliph’s name, regularly ravaged all the
Christian states. His semiannual plundering expeditions in the north not only
brought many slaves to Cordóba but also helped to divert the Muslims
from his usurpation of power. After defeating Count Borrell in 985, he burned
Barcelona and three years later plundered León; in 997 he sacked the
great Christian shrine of Santiago de Compostela.
However, with the death of al-Manṣūr,
the caliphate of Cordóba disintegrated.
The demise of Islamic rule allowed the
Christian states to breathe easily again. The ensuing civil wars among the
Muslims enabled Ramon Borrell, count of Barcelona (992–1018),
to avenge past affronts by sacking Cordóba in 1010. Alfonso V of León (999–1028)
exploited the situation to restore his kingdom and to enact the first general
laws for his realm in a council held at León in
History » Spain
under the Habsburgs » The
reign of Philip
III
very
consciousness of his divinely imposed obligations, compounded by his almost
pathological suspiciousness of the intentions and ambitions of other men, had
led him to deprecate independent initiative by his ministers. He thus failed to
educate an effective ruling class with a tradition of statesmanlike thinking
and decision making.
![Philip III, painting by Diego Velázquez, 1631–36; in the Prado Museum, Madrid.
[Credits : Archivo Iconografico, S.A./Corbis]](PEUPLES_BARBARES_fichiers/image002.gif "Philip III, painting by Diego Velázquez, 1631–36; in the Prado Museum, Madrid.
[Credits : Archivo Iconografico, S.A./Corbis]")
Devout
but indolent and passive, Philip III (1598–1621) was incapable of
carrying on his father’s methods of personal government. He therefore had
to have a minister (privado)
who would do all his work for him. His choice, Francisco
Gómez de Sandoval y Rojas, duque de Lerma, however, turned out to be a
singularly unfortunate one. Amiable, incompetent, and, inevitably, under heavy
attack from those who envied his position, Lerma strove to maintain himself by
the lavish dispensation of royal patronage to the high nobility. He was unable
to turn the schemes of the arbitristas into effective reforms. During the
reign of Philip III the government of Spain either became the victim of events
that it did not attempt to control or allowed its hand to be forced by
outsiders.
Not
all events could have been controlled. In 1599–1600 an epidemic plague
claimed some 500,000 victims in Castile. This sudden decimation of the labour force caused
a sharp rise in wages, which in turn acted as another disincentive to capital
investment by Spaniards. Yet the advantages that the labourers had reaped from
the rise in wages were quickly offset by renewed inflation, the result of the
government’s decision to solve its perennial financial problems by the massive
minting of vellón, a debased copper coinage.
Although this action did not prevent the need for another moratorium on government debts, in 1608 the king promised the Cortes
of Castile that the government would not issue any more vellón money for 20 years. But in 1617 and
1621 he was forced to ask the Cortes to allow additional issues.
History » Spain under the Habsburgs » The reign of Philip III » The expulsion of the Moriscos
The
plight of the Moriscos was the most serious social crisis of the reign. The
great majority of the Moriscos lived in the kingdom of Valencia. Like those of
Andalusia, they had been forcibly but ineffectively converted toChristianity. Most of them were relatively poor
farmers, agricultural labourers, or small tradesmen and hucksters. Although
they were hated and despised by the poor Christian peasants, the Moriscos were
protected by the landowners for whom they provided industrious tenants and
labourers.
For
many years a controversy raged between those who wanted to “solve”
the Morisco problem by expulsion and those who pleaded for time and money to
achieve the genuine assimilation and Christianization of the Moriscos. While
the practical economic aspects of these two views were not neglected, it was
characteristic of the Spain of the period that the main emphasis of the debate
was on the religious and moral problems. In 1609 Lerma’s government
ordered the expulsion of the Moriscos. Lerma saw it as part of a policy of
disengagement from “Castilian” power politics in central
Europe—he himself was a Valencian—and a renewed shifting of Spanish
energies toward North Africa and Islam. As a Valencian landowner, he also hoped
for personal gain from the confiscation of Morisco land. By 1614 some 275,000
Moriscos had been forced to leave Spain. The majority of Spaniards undoubtedly
approved of the expulsion.
The
economic effects of the expulsion have generated considerable debate, both at
the time and today. In Castile the effects were probably slight. In Aragon and
Valencia, where the Moriscos had constituted between 20 and 30 percent of the
population, they were certainly much greater. Some but by no means all Morisco
land was resettled by “old” Christians. There was a shift from
labour-intensive sugar and rice production to mulberry cultivation for silk and
viticulture. The greatest difficulties were caused by the indebtedness of the
Morisco peasants and the consequent losses suffered by their urban creditors.
An ironic footnote to the expulsion was the plight of the Aragonese and
Valencian Inquisitions. Although they once favoured expulsion, they were now
left without their major source of income, the composition fines for Moorish
practices that they imposed on the Morisco villages.
History » Spain under the Habsburgs » The reign of Philip III » Spain and Europe
Neither Philip III nor Lerma was
emotionally or intellectually capable of the fundamental reappraisal of foreign
policy that Philip II’s failures required. Very few even of the arbitristas had seen this need sufficiently
clearly. The court, the nobility, and, above all, the clergy and the
king’s confessors remained caught in the now-hardening tradition of
Spanish imperialism, simplistically interpreted as the cause of God. This
attitude caused a serious misjudgment of the political forces in England,
leading to the absurd hope of placing the infanta Isabella on the English throne upon the death
of Elizabeth I.
In
Fortunately for Spain, the new
government of James I was anxious for peace. On the Spanish
side, the Treaty of London (1604), which ended 16 years of
Anglo-Spanish war, was negotiated on the initiative of Philip II’s
son-in-law, the archduke Albert, to whom Philip II in his
last year had handed over the nominal sovereignty of the Spanish Netherlands.
Albert and his Genoese general, Ambrogio Spinola,
also urged the Spanish government to negotiate with the Dutch rebels. Between
1604 and 1607, Spain sent unprecedentedly large sums to Flanders. Spinola
captured Ostend (on the coast of present-day Belgium) and won victories in
Friesland (northern Holland). But, he wrote to Madrid, it would take 300,000
ducats a month to continue the war successfully. After the moratorium of 1607,
Philip III was in no position to raise such sums. He and Lerma, but not the
Castilian grandees in the Council of State, were prepared to recognize Dutch
independence, but they insisted that the Dutch withdraw from their recent
conquests in America and the East Indies.
The Dutch refused to accept this as well as an alternative Spanish condition,
the toleration of Roman Catholics in their state. As a compromise, the two
sides concluded a 12-year truce, beginning in 1609.
In
For Philip III and Lerma this attitude
led, for reasons of both finance and temperament, to a largely defensive
stance, though its effect was quite the opposite for the Spanish
representatives abroad. In the absence of an effective lead from Madrid, the
Spanish grandees who were the king’s viceroys and ambassadors in Europe
took it upon themselves to advance Spanish interests as they saw
them—that is, in terms of Spanish power. They fortified the route from
Milan to the Tirol (western Austria) through theValtellina, the vital link with
the Austrian Habsburgs; they annexed several
small Italian lordships; they enticed Dalmatian pirates (operating from the
eastern shore of the Adriatic), the Uskoks, to prey on the trade of Venice, and they
even seem to have plotted the complete overthrow of that republic.
More fateful still were their
activities in Prague and Brussels. At the courts of the
emperors Rudolf II and Matthias, the ambassador Baltazar de Zúñiga organized an effective
“Spanish” party. His successor, the conde
de Oñate, negotiated the secret Treaty of Graz (1617) by which the Jesuit-educated
archduke Ferdinand of Styria (later Emperor Ferdinand II)
was designated as heir to Matthias. In return for giving up Philip III’s
claims to the Austrian succession, which Madrid had never seriously pursued in
any case, Oñate obtained the promise of full Spanish sovereignty of the
Tirol and Alsace (now in eastern France), the two German pillars of the
“Spanish Road” between Italy and the Netherlands. At the same time,
the “Spanish” party in Prague managed the preelection of Ferdinand
as king of Bohemia in case of Matthias’s death.
Zúñiga and Oñate had undoubtedly strengthened
Spain’s strategic position in central Europe, but they had also, for the
first time since the abdication of Charles V, involved Spain again in the local
politics of the Holy Roman Empire. ForPhilip IV this involvement turned out to be even
more disastrous than it had for Charles V. Spanish leadership, as practiced by
the self-willed Castilian grandees abroad, had proved to be energetic and
clever, but it was ultimately as devoid of true statesmanship as the slackness
of the king and his privado.
In 1618 Lerma’s enemies at court
finally managed to overthrow him. Zúñiga returned to Madrid and
became the leading advocate of aggressive policies. Alonso
de la Cueva, marqués de Bedmar, former Spanish
ambassador to Venice and the organizer of the anti-Venetian conspiracy, went as
ambassador to Brussels and immediately began to press for the reopening of the
war against the United Provinces. In 1621 Philip III died, and with him
disappeared the last restraints on the neoimperialists. Only 16 years of age,
Philip IV left the effective powers of kingship in the hands of his former
gentleman of the chamber, the conde-duque de Olivares.
Olivares shared the political views of his uncle, Zúñiga, and he
soon dominated the Council of State.
History » Spain
under the Habsburgs » Philip IV’s reign »Spain
and the Thirty Years’ War
(the
elector palatine, or prince, from the Rhineland who had accepted the crown of
Bohemia when it was offered to him in 1618) and the Bohemians, Spanish troops
from the Netherlands entered the “Winter King’s” hereditary
dominions of the Rhenish Palatinate. Militarily, Spain was now in a
favourable position to restart the war with the United Provincesat the expiration of the truce in 1621.
The decision to do so was, however, taken on more general grounds. The Dutch had
used the truce only to capture the carrying trade with Spain of western Europe
and the Baltic, Zúñiga argued. On the oceans they had never
observed the truce but continued their piracies against Spanish and Portuguese
shipping. If they were allowed to continue, first the Indies would be lost,
then the rest of Flanders, Italy, and, finally, Spain itself, for it would have
lost the dominions that had made it great. These were very different grounds
for resuming the war from those habitually advanced by Philip II. Little was
said about religion or even the king’s authority, while the protection of
the overseas empire had become the central consideration in Spanish relations
with the Dutch rebels. Olivares dismissed the counterarguments of the Council
of Finance. The young king, content to be told that he was not responsible for
the debts of his predecessors, piously declared his intention not to burden his
subjects any further. Yet neither he nor his ministers could foresee that a
recent slump in silver shipments from America was not a temporary setback but
heralded a rapid, long-term decline. The Dutch were equally anxious for
war—partly, at least, because of the vain hope that the Belgians would
rebel against Spain and join the United Provinces.
![Philip IV, detail of a portrait by Diego Velázquez; in the National Gallery, London.
[Credits : Courtesy of the National Gallery, London]](PEUPLES_BARBARES_fichiers/image003.gif "Philip IV, detail of a portrait by Diego Velázquez; in the National Gallery, London.
[Credits : Courtesy of the National Gallery, London]")
Having
decided on war, Olivares pursued a perfectly consistent strategy:
communications between Spain and the Spanish Netherlands were to be kept open
at all costs, and the Dutch were to be hit wherever they were most vulnerable.
The first objective led Spain to build up a naval
force in
the Spanish Netherlands (Belgium) that preyed on Dutch shipping in the North
Sea and, on the diplomatic front, to cultivate the friendship of James I of
England and even to contemplate the restoration of Frederick V to the
Palatinate and the marriage of Philip IV’s devoutly Roman Catholic sister
to the heretic prince of Wales (later Charles
I).
It led to very close cooperation with the Austrian branch of the Habsburgs and
the need to fight for the control of the Valtellina. The second objective,
which followed the advance of the imperial armies under Albrecht Wallenstein (an
adventurer who made himself indispensable to the Habsburgs as a military
organizer) to the Baltic, led to grandiose schemes of building
an imperial Spanish fleet in the Baltic with Hanseatic (the Hanse towns on the
Baltic were independent mercantile organizations) and Danish help in order to
destroy the Dutch Baltic trade and with it the economic prosperity of the
republic.
However
rational and limited these aims and plans seemed in Spain, in the rest of
Europe they appeared to show only too clearly the limitless ambitions of the
house of Austria. The now habitual talk in Spanish court and military circles
of restoring Spain’s greatness did not help to persuade Europe otherwise.
Spinola’s and Wallenstein’s victories in the mid-1620s convinced
the Spanish Council of State that victory against the Dutch was possible and
blinded them to the danger of raising up new and more powerful enemies. Thus,
they let the last chances of a favourable peace slip away. Yet, despite
enormous sums sent annually from Castile to Flanders, the Spanish armies could
not break Dutch resistance. They could not even supply their own provisions and
ammunition without the covert help of Dutch merchants, who, in their turn, argued
that this trade with the mortal enemy brought in the money needed to pay for
the troops fighting this enemy. From 1630, when Sweden and
France actively intervened in the war, Spain rapidly lost the initiative. The
war was fought on a global scale, in central Europe and from the Philippines to
Brazil. Spanish armies could still win tactical victories in Italy and Germany,
but the number and seriousness of Spanish reverses, especially at sea, were now
steadily mounting.
History » Spain under the Habsburgs » Philip IV’s reign »The
government of Olivares
Olivares
was undoubtedly the most able politician directing the Spanish government since
Cardinal Granvelle. The Catholic Monarchs, the emperor, and Philip II had kept
the high nobility, to a greater or lesser degree, out of the central
government. Lerma had reversed this policy, and Olivares could not go back on
this position, although he bitterly lamented the incompetence of his fellow
aristocrats and sharply reduced the overgenerous flow of royal patronage to
them. He could—and did—develop a system of committees (juntas) of experts within the councils, which
took over a great deal of government business and made its administration more
efficient.
In
1623 and 1624 Olivares presented to the king and Council of State a number of
memorandums that were nothing less than plans for a far-reaching reform of
government and society on the lines advocated by thearbitristas.
Like them, Olivares saw the need to change mental attitudes; in particular, he
recognized the need for restraints on the aristocratic love of splendour and
display, the need to appreciate the dignity of work and productive economic
activity, and the need to end the economically harmful and morally indefensible
mania for limpieza
de sangre (Olivares
himself, through his grandmother, was of converso ancestry). On the more immediately
practical level, Olivares’s memorandums were concerned principally with
finance, for, with an annual expenditure of eight million ducats, there was a
deficit of four million. The count-duke proposed the abolition of some of the most
harmful taxes, the millonesand the alcabala,
and their substitution by simpler and more-equitable taxes. Finally, he argued
that Castile should not be expected to continue to bear nearly the entire cost
of the war. Like Granvelle, Olivares recognized that the king’s
non-Castilian dominions could be expected to share in the burdens of empire
only if they could also enjoy its advantages—the honours, commands, and
control over policy that had been all but completely reserved to the
Castilians.
None
of these plans was put into practice. The Spaniards were unwilling to change
their mode of life and their ingrained beliefs at the behest of a royal
favourite. Olivares did manage to arrange loans with a consortium of Portuguese
Marrano (Christianized Jews) businessmen, but he was bitterly attacked for this
action. The court itself gaily abandoned a short-lived austerity in the
celebrations that followed the arrival of the prince of Wales in his romantic
but abortive quest for a Spanish bride (1623). The financial reforms foundered
on the opposition of vested interests to taxation by the Cortes and on the
opposition of the whole Castilian ruling class to the plan for the
decentralization of the empire. Just as had happened to Granvelle’s
proposals, there was not even any serious discussion of Olivares’s plan.
In the 1560s the result of this failure had left Philip II with no alternative
but Alba’s policy of repression, which caused the revolt of the
Netherlands; in the 1620s it left Olivares with no alternative but his Union of Arms, which caused the revolts of Catalonia
and Portugal. The Union of Arms was a scheme for the creation of a reserve army
of 140,000 men that was to be paid for by the dominions of the Spanish empire
in proportion to their estimated resources. But the non-Castilian dominions
disliked this proposal because it infringed on their liberties. They also
distrusted Castilian intentions—and with good reason, for in 1625
Olivares had advised the king in a secret memorandum to “secretly plan
and work to reduce these kingdoms of which Spain is composed to the style and
laws of Castile.”
History » Spain under the Habsburgs » Philip IV’s reign »The
revolt of Catalonia
Apart
from Portugal, Catalonia was the state with the greatest degree of autonomy.
Its medieval form of government had not been changed sinceFerdinand the Catholic had
settled it in 1486. Its countryside, especially on the French border, was
infested with smugglers and bandits and riven by local feuds. Its taxes were
administered by the Diputació, a self-perpetuating and corrupt
committee of the Catalan Corts that functioned during the long intervals
between the meetings of that body. The viceroys, hemmed in on all sides by
local privileges and without control over the finances of the province, were
virtually powerless. In 1626 Philip IV summoned the Cortes of the realms of the
Crown of Aragon. Aragon and Valencia reluctantly voted some money but refused
conscription of troops. Catalonia refused everything. Nevertheless, Olivares
published the royal decree for the Union of Arms. Subsequently relations
between Madrid and Catalonia deteriorated rapidly.
As
the costs of warfare mounted, the government resumed the inflationary minting
of vellón coinage and had to declare yet another
moratorium on its debts, in
Olivares’s
logic was lost on the Catalans. The peasants, urged on by their clergy, refused
to support the troops. During the winter the soldiers were quartered in the
countryside. Soon there were clashes with the population, then riots and open
rebellion. Too late, Olivares attempted to draw back and appease the Catalans.
On June 7 the mob murdered the viceroy in Barcelona. The higher nobility and
the urban aristocracies were still anxious for an accommodation, but the
countryside was now completely out of control. The Diputació, which was
the only remaining legal authority, was led by a strong-minded cleric named Pau
Claris, canon of Urgel, located west of Barcelona, who was unwilling to make
concessions. In the autumn of 1640 Olivares scraped together the last available
troops and sent them against the Catalan rebels. Claris countered by
transferring Catalan allegiance to the king of France, “as in the time of
Charlemagne” (January 1641). French troops now entered Catalonia, and
only after French forces withdrew with the renewed outbreak of the French civil
wars (the Fronde) were the Castilians able to reconquer
Catalonia (1652). The Catalan upper classes were relieved, for they had found
the French even less congenial masters than the Castilians. Not repeating its
previous mistakes, Madrid fully restored the liberties and privileges of
Catalonia.
History » Spain under the Habsburgs » Philip IV’s reign »The
revolt of Portugal
The
revolt of Catalonia gave the Portuguese their
opportunity. The lower classes and the clergy had always hated the Castilians,
and the Portuguese aristocracy and the commercial classes—previously
content with the patronage and the economic opportunities that the union with
Spain had provided—had become dissatisfied during the preceding 20 years.
They resented the introduction of Castilians into their government (1634), the
ineffectiveness of Spanish naval support in the defense of Brazil against the
Dutch, and the growing reaction of the Spanish colonies against Portuguese
economic penetration during this period of contracting economic activity.
Rather than allow themselves to be sent to fight the Catalan rebels, the
Portuguese nobility seized power in Lisbon and proclaimed the duque de
Bragança as King John IV of
Portugal (December 1640). Madrid, with an aristocratic conspiracy in Andalusia
on its hands (1641), no longer had the means to react.
History » Spain under the Habsburgs » Philip IV’s reign »The
last years of Philip IV
The disasters on Spain’s
periphery were matched by continued mismanagement of Spanish finances at the
centre. Once more the government tampered with the vellón coinage and then reversed course into
a sudden and catastrophic deflation (1641–42). In January 1643 the
Castilian grandees were finally able to force Philip IV to dismiss Olivares. The king now decided to
run his own government. He dissolved the juntas, and the councils resumed their
authority. Soon control of the government slipped into the hands of
Olivares’s nephew, Luis Méndez de Haro,
a clever but colourless politician with neither his uncle’s imperial
vision nor his panache.
The defeats continued. In 1643 the
French king’s cousin, Louis II de Bourbon (the Great Condé),
broke the Spanish tercios and
their reputation for invincibility at the Battle of Rocroi in northeastern France. Popular
revolutions broke out in Naples and Palermo (Sicily) in 1647, and soon both
cities were controlled by revolutionary governments. The excessive taxation,
imposed for Spain’s war effort, had precipitated the rebellion, at least
in Naples. The Spanish monarchy, wrote the Venetian ambassador to Madrid at the
time,
resembled that great colossus that
during an earthquake had collapsed in a few moments while everyone hurried
along to enrich himself with the fragments.
![The European dominions of the Spanish Habsburgs in 1648.
[Credits : From R. Palmer and J. Colton, A History of the Modern World, Copyright © 1971; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.]](PEUPLES_BARBARES_fichiers/image004.gif "The European dominions of the Spanish Habsburgs in 1648.
[Credits : From R. Palmer and J. Colton, A History of the Modern World, Copyright © 1971; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.]")
In
fact, Spain survived and even managed to hold on to much of its empire. The revolts
of Naples and Sicily, directed as much against the local nobility as against
Spain, were suppressed in 1648. When the emperor conceded French claims to
Alsace and the Rhine bridgeheads, the “Spanish Road” to the
Netherlands was irrevocably cut, and the close alliance between the Spanish and
the Austrian branches of the house of Habsburg came to an end. With Portugal in
revolt and Brazil no longer an issue between the Dutch and the Spaniards,
Philip IV drew the only possible conclusion from this situation and rapidly
came to terms with the United Provinces, recognizing their full independence
and agreeing to stop overseas tradeon
the Schelde, a river emptying into the North Sea
west of Antwerp (Treaty of Münster,
January 1648). But Philip IV had not changed his basic policy. He wanted to
have his hands free for a final effort against France,
even after Catalonia had surrendered. Once again the temporary weakness of
France during the Fronde confirmed the Spanish
court in its disastrous military policy. Haro passed up the chance of
concluding a very favourable peace in 1656.
The war dragged on, with England joining France, capturing Jamaica, and
contributing to the Spanish defeat in the Battle of the Dunes on the northern coast of France
(1658). The Treaty of the Pyrenees (1659) cost Spain Artois (now
northernmost France), Roussillon, and part of Cerdagne. More important than
these relatively minor territorial losses was the realization throughout Europe
that Spain’s pretensions to hegemony had definitely and irremediably
failed. The Spaniards themselves were slow to admit it. Philip IV had made
concessions to France in order, once again, to have his hands free against the
last unforgiven enemy, Portugal. There was no longer any rational basis for his
hopes of success. All schemes for financial and tax reforms were still being
blocked by vested interests, and the government again had declared bankruptcies
in 1647 and
History » Spain
since 1975 » Transition
to democracy
After Franco’s death on Nov. 20,
1975, the accession of Juan Carlos as king opened a new era, which culminated
in the peaceful transition to democracy by means of the legal instruments of
Francoism. This strategy made it possible to avoid the perils of the
“democratic rupture” advocated by the opposition, which had united,
uneasily, on a common platform in July 1974. Arias Navarro, incapable of making
the democratic transition supported by the king, was replaced in July 1976 by Adolfo
Suárez González, a former
Francoist minister. Suárez persuaded the Francoist right in the Cortes
to pass the Law for Political Reform (November 1976), which paved the way for
democratic elections. Suárez then convinced the opposition of his
willingness to negotiate and his democratic intentions; in April 1977 he
legalized the PCE against the wishes of the armed forces. In the elections of
June 1977, Suárez’s party, a coalition of centrist groups called the Union of the Democratic Centre (UCD), emerged as the strongest party,
winning 165 seats in the Cortes, closely followed by the Spanish
Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), who captured 118 seats. It was
a triumph for political moderation and the consensus politics of Suárez.
The PCE gained 20 seats and the right-wing Popular Alliance 16.
Suárez formed a minority
government, and the political consensus held to pass the constitution of 1978.
The new constitution, overwhelmingly ratified in a public referendum in
December 1978, established Spain as aconstitutional monarchy.
Church and state were separated, and provisions were made for the creation of
17 autonomous communities throughout Spain, which extended regional autonomy
beyond Euskadi (the Basque Country, encompassing the provinces of Viscaya,
Guipúzcoa, and Álava) and Catalonia, both of which had already
been given limited autonomy. Confronted by terrorism and economic recession,
the UCD disintegrated into the factions of its “barons.” After
heavy defeats in local elections and fearing a possible military coup,
Suárez resigned in January 1981.
The inauguration of Leopoldo
Calvo Sotelo, also a member of the UCD, as prime minister was interrupted by the attempted
military coup of Lieutenant Colonel Antonio Tejero, who occupied the Cortes (Feb. 23,
1981) and held the government and the deputies captive for 18 hours. The coup
attempt failed, however, owing to King Juan Carlos’s resolute support of
the democratic constitution. Calvo Sotelo, who was left with the task of
restoring confidence in democracy, successfully engineered Spain’s entry
into the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1982.
History » Spain
since 1975 » The
administration of Felipe González, 1982–96
The election of October 1982 marked the
final break with the Francoist legacy, returning the PSOE under its leader, Felipe González,
whose government was the first in which none of the members had served under
Francoism. The PSOE won a solid majority (202 seats), while the UCD was
annihilated, winning only 12 seats. The conservative Democratic Coalition led
by Manuel Fraga gained 106 seats and formed the official opposition.
A radical party in 1975 committed to
the replacement of capitalism, the PSOE subsequently abandoned Marxism and
accepted a market economy. The new government made its main concern the battle
against inflation and the modernization of industry. González’s
policies were resisted by the unions (the socialist UGT and the CC.OO.
controlled by the PCE), which staged violent strikes against the closing of
uneconomic steel plants and shipyards. The left was further alienated by the
government’s decision to continue NATO membership, despite the party’s
official opposition to membership during the 1982 election. To justify this
radical departure from the PSOE’s traditional neutralism, membership in
NATO was submitted to a referendum and made dependent on a partial withdrawal
of U.S. forces stationed in Spain under the 1953 agreements. Spain also was to
make its contribution to collective defense outside the integrated military
command of NATO. The government won the referendum of March 12, 1986—a
triumph for González rather than evidence of understanding of or
enthusiasm for NATO. González also secured Spain’s entry into the
EEC in January 1986 after prolonged and difficult negotiations.
The government lost some support on the
left with the creation of theUnited Left (Izquierda Unida; IU), the core of
which was remnants of the PCE, and the right capitalized on law-and-order
issues, focusing on the fight against terrorism, disorder on the streets, the
rise in crime, and the development of a serious drug problem. The government
was accused of using its large majority to force through a major reform of
university andsecondary education and of abandoning socialist policies
in the battle against inflation and in its support of a
capitalist market economy. However, the government’s control of the PSOE
was ensured by its manipulation of political patronage.
It was furthermore troubled by frictions created by the demands of Euskadi and
Catalonia for greater autonomy. But the success of the government’s economic policies(inflation
fell and growth was resumed) and the popularity of González enabled the
socialists in the election of June 1986 to retain their majority (184 seats),
whereas Fraga’s conservative Popular Coalition (105 seats) failed to make
any gains and fell apart.
In its second term, the
government’s economic policies continued to provoke the hostility of the
trade unions—unemployment ran at nearly 20 percent—and on Dec. 14,
1988, the CC.OO. and the socialist UGT staged a general strike. In foreign policy,
all the major parties, with the exception of the United Left, supported the
government’s decision to offer logistical support to the United States
and its allies in
Even before the glamour of these
international events had faded, Spain entered a difficult period. The economy
experienced a downturn, the government was rocked by a series of corruption
scandals, and infighting within the PSOE reached intolerable levels. In these
highly unfavourable circumstances, Felipe González called new elections
for 1993. Surprisingly, the Socialists remained the largest party in the
Cortes, though without an absolute majority; they were forced to rely upon the
support of Catalan and Basque nationalists.
González’s fourth term got
off to a rocky start. Investigations led by judge Baltasar Garzón into
the “dirty war” against ETA during the mid-1980s led to accusations
that senior government officials had lent support to the Antiterrorist
Liberation Groups (Grupos Antiteroristas de Liberación), whose
activities included the kidnapping and murder of suspected ETA militants.
Another scandal, involving missing security documents, led to the resignation
of two ministers, including the deputy prime minister, Narcís Serra.
When Catalan leader Jordi Pujol withdrew his party’s support for the
government, González called new elections for March 1996, which were won
by the conservative Popular Party (Partido Popular),
although by a much narrower margin than had been expected and without a
parliamentary majority. Overall, the Popular Party captured 156 of the
Cortes’ 350 seats, while the PSOE was reduced to 141 seats.
Additional Reading » General
Works
Overviews of Spain include Adrian Shubert, The
Land and People of Spain (1992);
and Eric Solsten and Sandra W. Meditz, Spain:
A Country Study, 2nd ed. (1990). Richard
Carrington, The Mediterranean: Cradle of Western Culture (1971), discusses the evolution of the
area’s geologic structures, flora, and fauna and surveys its history.
Additional Reading » Land
General information about Iberian
geography appears in books about the physical geography of the Mediterranean
area and of Europe, notably Russell King, Lindsay Proudfoot, and Bernard Smith (eds.), The
Mediterranean: Environment and Society (1997), a general overview of the
historical, environmental, geographical, and social features of the
Mediterranean basin; Catherine Delano
Smith (Catherine
Delano-Smith),Western Mediterranean
Europe: A Historical Geography of Italy, Spain, and Southern France Since the
Neolithic (1979), a
systematic approach to the historical aspects of environment, settlement, and
economy; J.M. Houston, The
Western Mediterranean World: An Introduction to Its Regional Landscapes,
3rd ed. (1971); and Clifford Embleton (ed.),Geomorphology
of Europe (1984). Ricardo Méndez and Fernando Molinero, Geografía
de España (1993),
provides a general survey of the geography of Spain, with a focus on the
environment and the economy.Manuel de Téran, L. Solé Sabarís,
and J. Vilà Valentí (eds.), Geografía
regional de España, 5th ed., rev. and updated (1987), is the
most complete work on the subject. J.Ma.
García Alvarado and J.A. Sotelo Navalpotro (eds.),
Additional Reading » People
Adrian Shubert, A Social History of Modern Spain (1990, reprinted 1992), examines
Spanish society in the 19th and 20th centuries. John Hooper,The New Spaniards, new and rev. ed.
(1995), is an entertaining look at the people by a British journalist. An
interesting and useful survey of attitudes and opinions for the period of the
democratic transition isFrancisco Murillo Ferrol et al., Informe
sociológico sobre el cambio social en España, 1975/1983 (1983). Carmen Martín Gaite, Usos
amorosos de la postguerra Española (1987, reissued 1997), is a superb
essay by a novelist on relations between the sexes in the 1940s and ’50s. Miguel Juárez, V
informe sociológico sobre la situación social en España:
sociedad para todos en el año 2000, 2 vol. (1994), offers a
comprehensive review of Spanish social trends. Rafael Puyol (ed.),Dinámica
de la población en España: cambios demográficos en
último cuarto del siglo XX (1997),
provides a survey of the demography of Spain.
Additional Reading » Economy
William Chislett, Spain (1992),
provides a brief analysis of the Spanish economy with reference to its main
regions. Joseph Harrison, An
Economic History of Modern Spain (1978),
is a concise overview. Reviews of the economic history of the 19th and early
20th centuries include Nicolás
Sánchez-Albornoz (ed.), The
Economic Modernization of Spain, 1830–1930 (1987; originally published in
Spanish, 1985); andJordi Nadal, “The Failure of the
Industrial Revolution in Spain, 1830–1914,” pp. 532–626 in Carlo M. Cipolla (ed.), The
Emergence of Industrial Societies (1973,
reissued 1976), vol. 4 of The Fontana Economic History of Europe.
More-detailed coverage of 20th-century developments appears in Sima Lieberman, The
Contemporary Spanish Economy: A Historical Perspective (1982); and José Luis García Delgadoet
al., España,
economía, ante el siglo XXI (1999). Keith G. Salmon, The
Modern Spanish Economy: Transformation and Integration into Europe(1991,
reissued 1995), provides a sectoral analysis of Spanish economy at the end of
the 20th century.
Additional Reading » Government
and society
Michael T. Newton and Peter J. Donaghy, Institutions
of Modern Spain: A Political and Economic Guide, new expanded,
rev., and updated ed. (1997), is an essential overview of political, economic,
and institutional life in modern Spain. Peter J. Donaghy and Michael T. Newton, Spain:
A Guide to Political and Economic Institutions (1987), offers a superb description of
the institutions of democratic Spain. Paul Heywood, The
Government and Politics of Spain (1995),
presents a historical discussion of the modernization of the Spanish state. Thomas D. Lancaster and Gary Prevost (eds.), Politics
and Change in Spain (1985),
is a collection of essays on aspects of post-1975 Spain. Frances Lannon,Privilege, Persecution, and Prophecy: The Catholic
Church in Spain, 1875–1975 (1987),
provides a historical review of religion and church-state relations.
Additional Reading » Cultural
life
Richard E. Chandler and Kessel Schwartz, A
New History of Spanish Literature, rev. ed. (1991), surveys the
history of Spanish literature through the 1980s. Bradley Smith, Spain:
A History in Art (1966,
reissued 1971), covers the period up to 1930. John F. Moffitt, The
Arts in Spain(1999), offers a balanced overview of the art history
of Spain, with an emphasis on Spanish singularity and Spanish responses to
international art trends. Emma Dent Coad, Spanish
Design and Architecture (1990),
covers fashion, interior and graphic design, and furniture, as well as
architecture. Gilbert Chase, The
Music of Spain, 2nd rev. ed. (1959), is a survey. J.M. Caparrós Lera and Rafael de
España, The Spanish Cinema: An Historical Approach (1987), is a brief introduction that
goes up to 1975. J.M.
Caparrós Lera, Historia crítica del cine español:
desde 1897 hasta hoy (1999),
offers a more comprehensive history of Spanish film.
Additional Reading » History
Additional Reading » Pre-Roman
Spain
A general book, richly illustrated, is Richard J. Harrison, Spain
at the Dawn of History: Iberians, Phoenicians, and Greeks (1988). Arturo Ruizand Manuel Molinos, The
Archaeology of the Iberians (1998;
originally published in Spanish, 1993), is a study of the prehistoric
archaeology of Spain. Antonio
Beltrán, Rock Art of the Spanish Levant, trans.
from Italian (1982), gives an account of Mesolithic rock art.
Additional Reading » Roman
Spain
Works on this period include C.H.V. Sutherland, The
Romans in Spain, 217 B.C.–A.D. 117 (1939, reprinted 1982); S.J. Keay, Roman
Spain(1988); Leonard A.
Curchin, Roman Spain: Conquest and Assimilation(1991,
reissued 1995); J.S. Richardson, The
Romans in Spain (1996,
reissued 1998); and A.T. Fear, Rome
and Baetica: Urbanization in Southern Spain, c. 50 BC–AD 150 (1996).
Additional Reading » Visigothic
Spain
E.A. Thompson, The Goths in Spain (1969); Kenneth Baxter Wolf (trans. and ed.), Conquerors
and Chroniclers of Early Medieval Spain, 2nd ed., trans. from Latin
(1999); and the collection of essays in Edward James(ed.), Visigothic
Spain: New Approaches (1980),
are informative studies of the Visigothic period.
Additional Reading » Christian
Spain from the Muslim invasion to 1479
Joseph F. O’Callaghan, A History of Medieval Spain (1975, reissued 1983), is the standard
survey in English. Roger Collins, Early
Medieval Spain: Unity and Diversity, 400–1000, 2nd ed.
(1995); and Angus MacKay,Spain in the Middle Ages: From Frontier to Empire,
1000–1500 (1977,
reissued 1989), cover the medieval period. J.N. Hillgarth, The
Spanish Kingdoms, 1250–1516, 2 vol. (1976–78), studies
the late Middle Ages in greater detail. Derek W. Lomax, The
Reconquest of Spain (1978),
focuses primarily on military history. A modern work on the Cid is Richard Fletcher, The
Quest for El Cid (1989,
reissued 1991). Also important areThomas F. Glick, From
Muslim Fortress to Christian Castle: Social and Cultural Change in Medieval
Spain (1995); James F. Powers, A
Society Organized for War: The Iberian Municipal Militias in the Central Middle
Ages, 1000–1284 (1987);
and Heath Dillard, Daughters
of the Reconquest: Women in Castilian Town Society, 1100–1300 (1984, reissued 1989). Robert Ignatius Burns, The
Crusader Kingdom of Valencia: Reconstruction on a Thirteenth-Century Frontier,
2 vol. (1967),Islam Under the Crusaders: Colonial Survival in the
Thirteenth-Century Kingdom of Valencia (1973), and Medieval
Colonialism: Postcrusade Exploitation of Islamic Valencia (1975); and the excellent Mark D. Meyerson, The
Muslims of Valencia in the Age of Fernando and Isabel: Between Coexistence and
Crusade (1991), all
deal with the settlement of Valencia and the fate of the Muslims who remained
behind after the Christian reconquest. David Nirenberg, Communities
of Violence: Persecution of Minorities in the Middle Ages (1996, reprinted with corrections,
1998), is an important discussion of relations among Jews, Christians, and
Muslims in medieval Europe. Mark D. Meyerson, A
Jewish Renaissance in Fifteenth-Century Spain (2004), is an important recent study
of Jews in late medieval Spain.
Additional Reading » Muslim
Spain
Valuable works include Hugh Kennedy, Muslim
Spain and Portugal: A Political History of Al-Andalus (1996); Thomas F. Glick, Islamic
and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages (1979); Olivia Remie Constable,Trade and Traders in Muslim Spain: The Commercial
Realignment of the Iberian Peninsula, 900–1500 (1994, reissued 1996); Richard Fletcher, Moorish
Spain (1992, reissued
1998); and L.P. Harvey, Islamic
Spain, 1250 to 1500 (1990,
reissued 1992).
Additional Reading » United
Spain under the Catholic Monarchs and the Habsburgs
J.H. Elliott, Imperial Spain, 1469–1716 (1963, reissued 1977), is the best
single work covering this period. Henry Kamen, Spain,
1469–1714: A Society of Conflict, 2nd ed. (1991), is a short
introduction. Stephen Haliczer, The
Comuneros of Castile: The Forging of a Revolution, 1475–1521 (1981), is an important corrective to
the traditional overvaluation of the Catholic Monarchs. Recent work on the
Inquisition includes Norman Roth, Conversos,
Inquisition, and the Expulsion of the Jews from Spain(1995); Angel Alcalá (ed.), The
Spanish Inquisition and the Inquisitorial Mind (1987; originally published in
Spanish, 1984); Henry Kamen, The
Spanish Inquisition: An Historical Revision (1997); B. Netanyahu, The
Origins of the Inquisition in Fifteenth Century Spain (1995); and Mary E. Giles (ed.), Women
in the Inquisition: Spain and the New World (1999).
John Lynch, Spain Under the Habsburgs, 2nd ed., 2
vol. (1981, reissued 1984), provides a good overview of early modern Spain. Antonio Domínguez Ortiz, The
Golden Age of Spain, 1516–1659 (1971), is a synthesis by one of the
most distinguished Spanish scholars. Fernand Braudel, The
Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II,
2 vol. (1972–73, reissued 1995; trans. from French 2nd rev. ed., 1966),
is an economic and historical geography of the Mediterranean basin during the
16th century, in which Spain plays a central role; this book has become a
classic. M.J.
Rodríguez-Salgado,The
Changing Face of Empire: Charles V, Philip II, and Habsburg Authority,
1551–1559 (1988),
discusses Spanish foreign policy.Geoffrey Parker, Philip
II, 3rd ed. (1995), is a balanced study. Henry Kamen, Philip
of Spain (1997), is a
recent and controversial biography.John Francis Guilmartin, Jr., Gunpowder
and Galleys: Changing Technology and Mediterranean Warfare at Sea in the
Sixteenth Century(1974), studies war in the Mediterranean. Many
books were published for the 400th anniversary of the Armada campaign; among
these isColin Martin and Geoffrey Parker, The
Spanish Armada, 2nd rev. ed. (1999). Geoffrey Parker, The
Army of Flanders and the Spanish Road, 1567–1659: The Logistics of
Spanish Victory and Defeat in the Low Countries’ Wars (1972, reprinted with corrections,
1995), is the definitive work on the Spanish army in western Europe; and R.A. Stradling, The
Armada of Flanders: Spanish Maritime Policy and European War, 1568–1668 (1992), is the equivalent for the
Spanish navy. I.A.A. Thompson, War
and Government in Habsburg Spain, 1560–1620 (1976), studies the effects of war on
government in Spain. Jonathan I.
Israel, The Dutch Republic and the Hispanic World,
1606–1661 (1982,
reprinted 1986), is also useful. J.H. Elliott, The
Revolt of the Catalans: A Study in the Decline of Spain, 1598–1640 (1963, reissued 1984), and The
Count-Duke of Olivares: The Statesman in an Age of Decline (1986), are outstanding contributions
to Spanish history written in English. J.H. Parry, The
Spanish Seaborne Empire (1966,
reprinted 1990), is an excellent sketch of its subject. Jonathan Brown and J.H. Elliott, A
Palace for a King: The Buen Retiro and the Court of Philip IV (1980, reissued 1986), successfully
attempts to integrate the history of art with political history. Henry Kamen, The
Phoenix and the Flame: Catalonia and the Counter Reformation (1993), is an interesting study of
16th- and 17th-century Catalonia. Sara T. Nalle, God
in
Additional Reading » The
18th century
John Lynch, Bourbon Spain, 1700–1808 (1989, reprinted 1993), is an
excellent survey. Two specialist studies, using modern techniques, areRichard Herr, Rural
Change and Royal Finances in Spain at the End of the Old Regime (1989); and David R. Ringrose, Transportation
and Economic Stagnation in Spain, 1750–1850 (1970). Other specific topics are
addressed by William J.
Callahan, Church, Politics, and Society in Spain,
1750–1874 (1984),
and Honor,
Industry, and Commerce in 18th Century Spain (1972); and Richard Herr, The
Eighteenth-Century Revolution in Spain (1958, reissued 1969), on the reign of
Charles III.
Additional Reading » The
19th and early 20th centuries
Gerald Brenan, The Spanish Labyrinth: An Account of the Social and
Political Background of the Civil War, 2nd ed. (1950, reissued
1993), remains a stimulating introduction to the problems of modern Spain.
General histories of political, economic, and social developments include José Alvarez Junco and Adrian Shubert (eds.), Spanish
History since 1808 (2000); Adrian Shubert, A
Social History of Modern Spain(1990, reprinted 1992); Raymond Carr, Spain,
1808–1975, 2nd ed. (1982); Stanley G. Payne, Politics
and the Military in Modern Spain (1967);
and Carolyn P. Boyd, Praetorian
Politics in Liberal Spain (1979).
There has been a renewal of interest in
the economic history of this period. The classic work is Jordi Nadal, El
fracaso de la revolución industrial en España, 1814–1913,
5th ed. (1982). David R. Ringrose,Spain, Europe, and the “Spanish Miracle,”
1700–1900 (1996,
reissued 1998); and Leandro Prados
de
Sources on early- and mid-19th-century
politics include Jesus Cruz,Gentlemen, Bourgeois, and Revolutionaries: Political
Change and Cultural Persistence among the Spanish Dominant Groups,
1750–1850(1996); Renato Barahona, Vizcaya
on the Eve of Carlism: Politics and Society, 1800–1833 (1989); V.G. Kiernan, The
Revolution of
Among the important recent works on the
late Spanish empire areChristopher Schmidt-Nowara, Empire
and Antislavery: Spain, Cuba, and Puerto Rico, 1833–1874 (1999); and Sebastian Balfour, The
End of the Spanish Empire, 1898–1923 (1997).
Additional Reading » Primo
de Rivera (1923–30) and the Second Republic (1931–36)
The excellent but misleadingly titled
work by Shlomo Ben-Ami, Fascism
from Above: The Dictatorship of Primo de Rivera in Spain, 1923–1930(1983),
deals with the dictatorship, and The Origins of the Second Republic in Spain (1978), chronicles its collapse. George Esenwein andAdrian Shubert, Spain
at War: The Spanish Civil War in Context, 1931–1939 (1995), is a recent synthesis. Paul Preston, The
Coming of the Spanish Civil War: Reform, Reaction, and Revolution in the Second
Republic, 2nd ed. (1994); Nigel Townson, The
Crisis of Democracy in Spain: Centrist Politics under the Second Republic,
1931–1936 (2000);
and Edward E. Malefakis, Agrarian
Reform and Peasant Revolution in Spain: Origins of the Civil War (1970), are detailed studies of
aspects of politics during the Second Republic.
Additional Reading » The
Civil War (1936–39) and Franco’s Spain (1939–75)
Hugh Thomas, The Spanish Civil War, 3rd ed., rev. and
enlarged (1977, reissued 1994), is a narrative history; Raymond Carr, The
Civil War in Spain, 1936–39, new ed. (1986), takes a wider
view. Burnett Bolloten,The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution (1991), is an encyclopaedic account. George Orwell, Homage
to Catalonia (1938,
reissued 2000), remains a classic account of political feuds in Barcelona. Michael Alpert, A
New International History of the Spanish Civil War (1994, reissued 1997), covers
international aspects of the conflict; and Mary Nash, Defying
Male Civilization: Women in the Spanish Civil War (1995), covers the role of women.
The standard work on Francoism is Stanley G. Payne, The
Franco Regime, 1936–1975 (1987,
reissued 2000). Paul Preston, Franco:
A Biography (1993,
reissued 1995), is the definitive account of the dictator’s life. Michael Richards, A
Time of Silence: Civil War and the Culture of Repression in Franco’s
Spain, 1936–1945 (1998),
is a provocative study of early Francoism. Amando de Miguel, Manual
de estructura social de España (1974), discusses Francoist society.Sebastian Balfour, Dictatorship,
Workers, and the City: Labour in Greater Barcelona Since 1939 (1989), is an excellent study of the
labour movement.
Additional Reading » Spain
since 1975
Sources on the period of political
transition include Raymond Carr andJuan Pablo Fusi Aizpurúa, Spain:
Dictatorship to Democracy, 2nd ed. (1981, reissued 1991; originally
published in Spanish, 1979); and Paul Preston, The
Triumph of Democracy in Spain (1986,
reissued 1990).Víctor M. Pérez-Díaz, The
Return of Civil Society: The Emergence of Democratic Spain (1993, reissued 1998; originally
published in Spanish, 1987), is an important interpretive essay. Charles T. Powell, El
piloto del cambio: el rey, la monarquía y la transición a la
democracia(1991), examines the role of King Juan Carlos in the
transition.
Among the many studies of regional
nationalism, the most important include Daniele Conversi, The
Basques, the Catalans, and Spain: Alternative Routes to Nationalist
Mobilisation (1997,
reissued 2000);Juan Díez Medrano, Divided
Nations: Class, Politics, and Nationalism in the Basque Country and Catalonia (1995); and Robert P. Clark, The
Basque Insurgents: ETA, 1952–1980 (1984), and Negotiating
with ETA: Obstacles to Peace in the Basque Country, 1975–1988 (1990).
|
Les
Suèves (en latin Suebi, ou Suevi) |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Peuple germanique établi
d'abord à l'Est de l'Elbe et comprenant plusieurs groupes (Marcomans,
Quades, Semnons). Au Ier siècle
av. J.-C., les Suèves émigrèrent vers le S.-O.,
tentèrent d'entrer en Gaule,
mais, repoussés par César (58 av. J.-C.), ils
s'installèrent entre le Rhin et le Danube, dans Poussés sans doute par
d'autres peuples migrants, les Suèves quittent la rive orientale de
l'Elbe au Ier siècle
avant notre ère. Ils forment un peuple disparate composé de
différentes tribus dont celles entre autres des Quades, des Marcomans
et des Semnons. Leur route vers le sud-ouest les amena aux abords de Dès lors, c'est sur la rive
orientale du Rhin qu'ils se fixent, dans une région qui prend plus
tard leur nom,
En 406, dans les premières
décennies des Grandes invasions barbares dans l'Empire
romain(Wisigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandales et Alains parmi tant d'autres, poussés
par les Huns), de nouvelles pressions migratoires les poussent à
passer le Rhin sous leur roi Ermaric et accompagnés des Asdings, des
Silings, et de plusieurs clans alains (nuit de En 411, après un tirage au
sort sur le partage de cette province romaine, ils s'installent dans le
nord-ouest du pays (Galice et nord du Portugal actuels) et commencent
à organiser un petit royaume avec principalement les villes de Braga,
Lugo, Vigo, Tuy, Orense et Porto. Cherchant à agrandir leur
domination vers le sud et l'est, en lutte contre les autres bandes
armées barbares, ils sont battus par les Wisigoths en 418 et sont
forcés de se cantonner en Galice. Après le passage des Vandales
réunis et des restes des Alains en Afrique romaine 429, les
Suèves tentent de nouveau la conquête de la péninsule
ibérique mais doivent s'opposer aux pressions des Wisigoths qui
tentent eux aussi une domination sur le pays qui devient effectif sous leur
puissant roi Euric autour de l'an 476. Une alliance entre les deux peuples
est conclu, leur roi Réchiaire se converti à l'arianisme des Goths avec son peuple, et les Suèves accompagnent les Wisigoths du roi
Théodoric pour combattre les Huns d'Attila aux Champs catalauniques
(451). |
|
||
|
Teutons Here are notes associated with the early Germanic tribes who wandered Europe in late Classical times and the early Dark Ages. This catalogue should not be considered complete - there are a great many smaller German tribes not listed; as I develop more data, I will add to what is here, but what follows can be considered at least a broad sampling of the largest and most significant. This file can be considered a companion to my file on eastern Nomads - each can be studied with a view toward analyzing the different sorts of pre-literate nomads (barbarians, in popular parlance) to have wandered Eurasia. Covers early Germanic tribes - currently the Alemanni, Banings, Bastarnae, Bavarii, Burgundians, Chauci, Cherusci, Cimbri,Franks, Franks - Chatti, Franks - Ripuarian, Franks - Mythological, Franks - Salian, Franks - Sicambri, Gepids, Goths, Goths - Ostrogoths, Goths - Tauric, Goths - Visigoths, Hermanduri, Heruli, Hundings, Ingvaeones, Irminones, Istvaeones, Lombards,Marcomanni, Myrgings, Quadi, Rugians, Saxons, Sciri, Sennones, Suevi, Teutons, Thuringii, Tungri, Ubii, Vandals, Vandals - Asding, Vandals - Siling, and Warni. Other German Files: |
||||
ALEMANNI The Alemanni were a late classical-era people who succeeded in occupying southwestern Germany, Alsace, and northern Switzerland in the 3rd century (first mentioned in 213 CE). They were a confederation of various tribes (very likely the Hermanduri and Sennones as major constituents), the chieftaincy of which provided only minimal authority for their region, largely in terms of military leadership. Their name survives today as the base for most Romance language appelations of the German people (Allemagne, Alemannia, etc.)
- Central Germany, c. 200-c. 250
- Chroc..........................................fl.
c. 253
- Swabia, c. 250-911
- ??
- Chronodemar.................................fl.
c. 350 and...
- Gundomad.......................................fl.
350's and...
- Vadomar........................................
? -361 d. aft. 371
- Suomar.........................................fl.
360's with...
- Hortar.........................................fl.
360's
- Vithicab
Vadomarsson...............................c. 371
- Macrian........................................fl.
c. 375
- ??
- Gibuld.........................................fl.
c. 470
- ?
- Alemanni to the Franks.........................496-511
- Within Frankish Austrasia thereafter...
- Leuthari...............................c. 536-554 with...
- Butilin................................c. 536-554 and...
- Haming.................................... ? -c. 539
- Leutfred I............................. < 570-587
- Uncilen...................................588-613
- Gunzo..................................... ? -613
- Chrodebert.............................c. 615-639
- Leutfred II............................c. 640-673/95
- vacant ?
- Godefred...............................c. 700-709
- Huocin.................................... ? - < 712
- Willehari................................. ? -c. 712
- vacant ?
- Lanfred I..............................c. 720-730
- Nebi...................................... ? -746 with...
- Theodobald............................. < 737-744
- Lanfred II................................746-749
- probably vacant
- Gerold....................................791-799
- THURGAU
- Isenbard..................................799-806
- Vacant. In the 9th century, various
Carolingians assumed a position of Duke of the Alemanni, thereby retaining
some measure of direct authority over southwestern Germany.
- CAROLINGIAN
- Charles (II) the Bald (HRE
875-877).......829-833 d. 877
- Louis (I) the Pious (HRE
814-840).........833-840
- Louis (II) the German.....................840-863 d. 876
- Charles (III) the Fat (HRE
881-888).......863-887 d. 888
- Arnulf (HRE 896)..........................887-899
- Louis (IV) the Child......................899-911
- Titular usage abandoned;
southwestern Germany reorganized as the Duchy of Swabia thereafter...
BANINGS A people
mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Widsith poem. Their location is
unknown.
- Becca..........................................fl. c. 500
BASTARNAE A tribe
located in the northeastern Balkans - generally eastern Transylvania, Moldavia,
and much of modern Moldova. Their antecedents are obscure: Roman authorities
normally referred to them as Germans, and modern research has confirmed that to
a large degree - but they dwelt in a region far removed from other Teutonic
folk of their time, and they show some characteristics of Steppe-dwelling
Iranians such as Scyths and Sarmatians. They first occur as mercenaries in late
Macedonian and Pontine service, and were subdued by Rome in 29 BCE. Thereafter
they gave little trouble to the Romans until the late 3rd century CE, when they
were defeated by Probus and forcibly resettled on the south bank of the Danube.
- Moldavia, c. 250 BCE-279 CE
- Deldo..........................................
? -29 BCE
- Northeastern Bulgaria, 280- 4th
cent.
- Fade from view - presumably
absorbed into Gothic and Hunnic nations...
BATAVI The Batavi were a
Germanic tribe, originally part of the Chatti, who
appeared in the central Netherlands before the 1st century CE, presumably
pushing aside the earlier inhabitants, probably early Frisians. Their central
region seems to have been the present Betuwe, the territory between Waal and
Meuse, and central North-Brabant. Tacitus described their home as "an
uninhabited district on the extremity of the coast of Gaul, and also of a neighbouring
island, surrounded by Ocean in front, and by the river Rhenus in the rear and
on either side." The name may derive from the Germanic batawjo or
"good island". Finds of wooden tablets demonstrate that the Batavians
had a system of writing. They were assimilated into the Salian Franks in the
late Classic era, but their name and heritage continues to resonate with the
Dutch - they provided a focus of self-identity and inspiration for for
resistence by Dutch patriots during the Eighty Years War (1568-1648) of
Netherlands Independence, and the revolutionary French client-state established
in 1795 was called the Batavian Republic.
- Roman subjects, c. 4 BCE
- I have no names of Batavian rulers
as such - the following two individuals should, however, be mentioned...
- Chariovalda........................... fl. 14-15 CE
- A commander of a group of Batavian
auxiliaries (dux Batavorum).
- Gaius Julius Civilis.................. fl. 69-70
- The leader of a Batavian
insurrection against Roman rule. Initially successful, he was later
pushed back to the Island of the Batavians and made peace with the Roman
general Quintus Petilius Cerialis. He disappears from history after 70
CE.
- To the Salian Franks c. 297
BAVARII A large and
powerful tribe which emerged late in Teutonic tribal times, in what is now the
Czech Republic (Bohemia). They replaced, or perhaps are simply another phase
of, the previous inhabitants - the Rugians. They swiftly expanded their
influence southward, and occupied Austria and the area which still bears their
name: Bavaria.
- Czech Republic (Bohemia), c. 500-c. 550
- Theodo
I.......................................508-512
- Austria and Bavaria, c. 520-788
- Theodo
II......................................512-537
- Theodo
III.....................................537-565 with...
- Theodobald.....................................537-567
and...
- Garibald
I.....................................550-590
- Grimwald
I.....................................590-595 with...
- Tassilo
I......................................591-609
- Garibald
II....................................609-640 with...
- Agilolf........................................609-630
- Theodo
IV......................................640-680
- Theodo
V.......................................680-702
- Theodobert.....................................702-725
with...
- Grimwald
II....................................702-723 and...
- Theodobald.....................................702-715
and...
- Tassilo
II.....................................702-730 with...
- Hubert.........................................725-737
- Odilo..........................................737-748
- Tassilo
III....................................748-788
- To the Carolingian Empire......................788-843
- To the Kingdom of the East Franks
(Germany) after 843. Bavaria organized as a Duchy from 889, Austria emerges as a Margraviate from c.
960.
BURGUNDIANS The Burgundians
were a relatively minor tribe, but they have had a significant impact on
Europe. They have formed the name or foundation of a rather bewildering variety
of Dark Age and Mediaeval nations and states. Culturally, the late phase of
their Rhineland kingdom provides the source for the Germanic epic of the Nibelungenlied,
the Siegfried Saga. Perhaps their most enduring contribution, though, is a
written code of laws, compiled during (475 CE) the reign of Gundobad which
provides a priceless view of Dark Age Teutonic society.
- Central Poland, c. 10 CE-c. 250
- Migration across central Germany
and resettlement in the Rhineland, c. 250-c. 275
- The Rhineland (Capital at Worms),
c. 275-436
- Gebicca.................................late
300's-407
- Godemar
- Giselcar
- Gundicar.......................................413-436
- The Upper Rhone basin in
southeastern France, 436-532
- Gunderic.......................................436-473
opposed by...
- Chilperic
I....................................443-c.480 opposing...
- Gundobad.......................................473-516
opposed by...
- Chilperic
II...................................473-474 and...
- Gundomar.......................................473-486
and...
- Godegisel......................................473-500
- Sigismund......................................516-523
- Gundimar.......................................523-532
- To Neustria (the Franks).......................532-534
- MEROVINGIAN Upon being absorbed by the Franks,
the region of Burgundy enjoyed a sporadic autonomy under several lines of
Merovingian Kings.
- Chlothar
I.....................................534-561 with...
- Childebert
I...................................534-558
- Guntram........................................561-592
- To Austrasia...................................592-595
- Theodoric
I....................................595-613
- To Austrasia...................................612-639
- To Neustria, and thence within the
Carolingian Empire. When that broke up, Burgundy again emerged in two
separate, short-lived Kingdoms (Arles - sometimes Provence or Lower
Burgundy, 879-933; and Burgundy, sometimes Upper
Burgundy, 888-1032). In France, an important Duchy in eastern France emerged c.
1025-1482; and a county based around Dijon, c. 880-1678.
All of these states were associated with the Holy Roman Empire at one time
or another, but most of the territory was eventually annexed to France.
Note, though, that the later phase of the Duchy acquired almost complete control
over the Low Countries, and those regions pursued a separate
history after the 15th century.
CHAUCI A numerous tribe
inhabiting the extreme northwestern shore of Germany during Roman times -
basically the stretch of coast between Frisia in the west to the Elbe estuary
in the east. By the end of the 3rd century CE, they had merged with the Saxons:
whether this conjunction was amicable or forced is not clear - indirect
evidence supporting each viewpoint is present. I suspect that a little of each
was present, but that Saxon conquest was predominant.
CHERUSCI A nation
inhabiting the Rhine valley and the forests of western Germany (near modern
Hanover) during the 1st century BCE and 1st century CE. They were first allies
of, and then enemies of, Rome. They are most famous for the Battle of
Teutoburger Wald, when a Cherusci army under Herman annihilated three legions under
the command Publius Quinctilius Varus. The Cherusci leaders were called
"Drighten" or "warlord".
- The central Rhineland, c. 50 BCE-c. 125 CE
- Sigimer
- Herman
Siegfried (Arminius)......................9-21 CE opposed by...
- Herman enrolled in the Roman army
in 1 CE and, because of his perceived rank as a noble of his people,
granted Citizenship with the status of Equites, he nevertheless returned
to the forests and organized a revolt. In addition to being the destroyer
of Roman legions, he may be the Siegfried of German mythology.
- Segestes
(mostly in exile)......................17-early
20's
- ?
- Italicus........................................47-c.50
- Italicus was a nephew of Herman
raised in Rome and appointed by Emperor Claudius.
- Chariomerus....................................fl.
90's
- By the time Tacitus wrote the Germania in 98 CE, he described the Cherusci
thus: "[T]he Cherusci have been left free from attack to enjoy a
prolonged peace, too secure and enervating - a pleasant but perilous
indulgence among powerful aggressors, where there can be no true peace.
When force decides everything, forebearance and righteousness are
qualities attributed only to the strong; and so the Cherusci, once known
as 'good, honest people', now hear themselves called lazy fools...."
- They were gradually absorbed into
surrounding Germanic nations, particularly the Lombards.
CIMBRI A Germanic
tribe originally from the Jutland peninsula. They were one of the first
Germanic peoples to invade Italy and enjoyed some success before being defeated
by Gaius Marius. See also, the Teutons,
for an associated nation who accompanied these people for much of their
wandering.
- Teutobachus the Giant
- Boiorix.................................late
100's-101 BCE
FRANKS The
Frankish people were confederation of local Teutonic peoples dwelling in the
Netherlands and northwestern Germany. In the 5th century they began migrating
westward across the Low Countries and into northern France. In Normandy they
displaced the last remaining Roman legion and settled the land. The following
lists delineate the early Frankish leaders before the divisions of the early
6th century. The Merovingian dynasty takes its name from the first Frankish
ruler to penetrate what would become French territory, circa 450.
- Early, mythological Franks Since I regularly include this sort of data elsewhere, there is no reason not to so note the Franks. Because the Franks were regarded as the founders (via the Carolingian Empire) of both France and Germany, their memory lingered long in the annals of European historiographers and genealogists, a memory which is still found within modern genealogical records. It was universal practice among Mediaeval and especially Renaissance nobility to draw back their antecedents to a dimly Graeco-Roman Classical origin, and the complex genealogies ascribed to very early Frankish rulers are no exception - one will note a strongly Hellenistic element to many of these names. One will also see a specific (and rather improbable) connection made with another very ancient people - the Cimmerians (who weren't Teutons at all, they were a proto-Iranic group). These connections must be viewed with indulgence; the early Franks were not a lost tribe of Cimmerians, nor were they a north-wandering group of Classical Greeks. They, in concert with their near relatives (the Chatti, Ubii, and Hermanduri), and their somewhat more distant kin (Frisians, Saxons, Lombards and Goths), wandered out of Scandinavia in the late first Millenium BCE. Even so, I include this list as an example of creative genealogy, in the suspicion that buried within it may lurk a recollection of some early tribal chief.
- ?
Antenor II (on the Black Sea)....................d. 443
- ?
Marcomer I................................c. 443-c. 412
- Antenor
III.................................c. 412-c. 384
- Priamus.....................................c.
384-c. 358
- The tribe of the Cimmerians changes
its name to the Sicambri in honour of Priamus' mother.
- Helenus.....................................c.
358-c. 339
- Diocles.....................................c.
334-c. 300
- Bassianus
Magnus............................c. 300-c. 241
- Chlodomer
I.................................c. 241-c. 232
- Nicanor.....................................c.
232-c. 198
- Marcomer
II.................................c. 198-c. 170
- Chlodio
I...................................c. 170-c. 159
- Antenor
II..................................c. 159-c. 143
- Chlodomer
II................................c. 143-c. 123
- Merovech.....................................c.123-c.
95
- Cassander....................................c.
95-c. 74
- Antharius
I..................................c. 74-c. 39
- Franco.......................................c.
39-c. 11 BCE
- Continued with the Sicambri, below.
- Batavi The Batavians were a sept of the Chatti who separated and
settled at the estuary of the Rhine and Maas Rivers in southern
Netherlands. For details see above, in a separate article.
- Chatti (Hessian Franks) The Chatti were a turbulent tribe
located in Western Germany - they are known to have moved from a homeland
around the Weser River in the second half of the 1st Century to a new
region around the Main River. They are commented on from c. 83 CE to c.
213 CE, often allying themselves with Roman enemies and causing
considerable difficulties on the frontier. They seem to have been absorbed
into the Frankish people during the 3rd Century, probably as members of a
new confederation joining them with the Ripuarians and Salians. Even so, I
have notes on Warlords referred to as Chatti both from the beginning of
the Common Era and toward the end of the 3rd century...
- Adgandestrius.................................
fl. 19 CE
- ??
- Atech..........................................fl.
280's
- Ascaric........................................fl.
c. 300 with...
- Ragaise........................................fl.
c. 300
- Note also, at a later date...
- Chattuarii (Hætwaras) The
Chattuarii or Attoarii were a Frankish tribe living in the inland portion
of the Netherlands, near the Rhine river. In Beowulfthey are described fighting off a
Geatish raiding force led by King Hygelac.
- Hun............................................fl.
c. 500
- To the Franks c. 600
- Ripuarian Franks Based at Cologne.
- Sigibert
the Lame.............................. ? -c. 508
- Chloderic..........................................c.
508
- To the Salian Franks
- Salian Franks A group of Eastern Franks settled
along the Ijssel River in the Lower Rhine region; allies of Rome in the
4th century, they pushed across the frontier in the 5th and established
themselves in northern Gaul, becoming the primary Frankish tribe, and the
one from which subsequent Frankish nations emerged. Their name has become
enshrined in European legal genealogical practice inasmuch as they were
reputed to have a rule forbidding any succession by females (or even
through female lines of descent ) to the chieftaincy - this
"Salic" law was the basis for succession theory in much of
western Europe, particularly among the Carolingian and Capetian French.
- Western Germany (mainly the
Rhineland) and the Low Countries (Gelderland)
- Genobald....................................c.
317-c. 358
- Dagobert....................................c.
358-c. 379
- Chlodio.....................................c.
379-c. 389
- Marcomer....................................c.
389-c. 404 and...
- Sunno..........................................fl.
c. 394
- To the Sicambrian Franks ? .................c. 404-c. 420
- Faramund.......................................420-428
- Chlodio........................................428-448
- Merovech.......................................448-458
- Normandy c. 470 and therafter;
expanding steadily from there, south and southeast...
- Childeric
I (at Tournai, Belg.)................458-481
- Note that there is a story found in
Gregory of Tours History of the Franks to the effect that Childeric was deposed
by the Franks, who thereupon set the chief Roman military leader,
Ægidius, to rule them. The story goes on to relate that Childeric
found refuge in Thuringia and was recalled to his throne after eight
years. Well, maybe. The dates don't match - Ægidius died in 464, and
is known to have cooperated with Childeric in a joint military venture
against the Visigoths in 463. And Childeric is known to have participated
in another expedition against the Visigoths with one of Ægidius'
successors, theComes Paulus, in 469. I comment on this
in the interest of showing what a tangled trail one can find oneself on in
pursuit of distantly remembered events.
- Chlovis
I (at Paris)...........................481-511
and...
- Some comment regarding Chlovis (the
name is an early form of "Louis", the first French Louis to make
his influence felt in Europe) is appropriate - he stands at the cusp
between the Classical and Modern worlds, and his presence has done much to
shape the way matters went thereafter. He conquered most of northern
France early in his career, and after several moves to expand influence
into central and southern Gaul, remained at Paris to consolidate his hold
over the region. Turning to Christianity during his reign, he opted for
Athanasian (Roman Catholic) rather than Arian forms, thus helping to
insure eventual Catholic primacy. Finally, by ridding himself of turbulent
sub-kings in the north and establishing himself as unquestioned paramount
chief of the entire Salian people, he gave impetus to the notion of a
united Frankish state, a dream that would emerge as a reality by
Carolingian times. Chlovis was 15 when he was acclaimed Chief of the
Salians, and 45 when he died as King of the Franks.
- Chararic
(at Tongres, Belg.)...................
? -c. 509 and...
- Ragnachar
(at Cambrai).........................
? -509 and...
- Ricchar
(at Le Mans)...........................
? -509
- 1st division: see All the Franks, Austrasia, (Frankish) Burgundy, and Neustria.
- Sicambri The Sicambri (or Sugambri) were a
tribe of Western Franks living, when they became noticed by literate foes,
between the Ruhr and Sieg Rivers, adjacent to the Ubii. The enumeration
(and the Hellenic name of the 5th ruler) hearkens back to their supposed
Cimmerian antecedents - see themythologic Franks at the beginning of this section.
- Western Germany
- Franco.......................................c.
39-c. 11
- Chlodio
II...............................c. 11 BCE-c. 20 CE
- Marcomer
III.................................c. 20-c. 50
- Chlodomer
III................................c. 51-c. 63
- Antenor
IV...................................c. 63-c. 69
- Rather.......................................c.
69-c.90
- Richemer.....................................c.
90-c. 114
- Odomar......................................c.
114-c. 128
- Marcomer
IV.................................c. 128-c. 149
- ?
Chlodomer IV..............................c. 149-c. 166
- ?
Farabert..................................c. 166-c. 186
- Sunno
(Hunno)...............................c. 186-c. 213
- Hilderic....................................c.
213-c. 253
- Barther.....................................c.
253-c. 272
- Chlodio
III.................................c. 272-c. 298
- Walter......................................c.
298-c. 306
- Dagobert
I..................................c. 306-c. 317
- Chlodomer...................................c.
317- ?
- Richemer........................................d.
c. 350
- Theodomer...................................c.
350-c. 360
- Chlodio
IV..................................c. 360-c. 378
- Dagobert....................................c.
378-c. 389
- Genobald....................................c.
389-c. 419
- Identical to the Salians after c. 420
- and another Frankish ruler at Cambrai,
Ragnachar (also d. c. 509).
FRISIANS These were
(still are, for that matter) dwellers along the North Sea coast, in northern
Netherlands and far northwestern Germany. As they are more directly associated
with Low Countries history, I have lists of their early rulers HERE.
GEPIDS An early group
which settled originally on the coast of what is now Poland, and was never in
very close contact with the Roman south.
- Northern Poland, c. 10 CE-c. 200
- Migration south through Poland and
into Galitzia, c. 200-c. 250
- Transylvania, c. 250-568
- Fastida........................................fl.
c. 250
- To the Huns.................................c. 380-453
- Ardaric........................................fl.
c. 454
- Gunderit
- Trapstila......................................fl.
488/9
- Trasericus.....................................fl.
504/5
- Mundonus
- Gelemund.......................................
? -c. 549
- Thurisind..................................fl.
549-552
- Kunimund........................................d.
560's
- Destroyed by the Avars, 568
GOTHS The Goths were
among the first Teutonic people to differentiate themselves from the original
homeland, and establish themselves as a separate nation. They began their
journeys from central Sweden in the early 1st century BCE - various locations
there still recall in name their ancient inhabitants (see, for example, Gotland and Götland).
They traveled slowly south and southeastward, across the Baltic and into what
is now Belarus and the Ukraine. Here they differentiated into the two divisions
that they would always be known by thereafter - the Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths)
and the Visigoths (Western Goths). Interestingly enough, the Goths themselves
retained a legend to the effect that they began their migrations at the behest
of a group of foreign nobles who, arriving in Goth territory from "the far
south", managed to secure leadership of the tribe and convince them to
undertake extended conquest of lands to their south, back toward the homeland
of these foreigners. It has occasionally been speculated, without much in the
way of hard evidence, that there actually was a group of (what? Greek, Roman?)
exiles who form the basis of this tale.
- The (early) GOTHS
- The Lower Vistula basin, c. 50
BCE-c. 200 CE
- Berig
- 2 unnammed Kings
- Gadaric
?
- Migration across Silesia and
Galitzia, c. 200-c. 225
- Filimer
- Moldavia and western Ukraine, c.
225-c. 250
- Tanausis
?
- Gudila
- Buruista
- Bulgaria and Thrace, 249-c. 268
- Cniva..........................................fl.
251
- Division into Eastern and Western
hordes, c. 270
- The OSTROGOTHS
- The Ukraine, c. 270-375
- Respa
- Veduc
- Thuruar
- Ariaric
with...
- Aoric
- Geberic
- Hermanerich......................................
-376
- To the Huns....................................376-453
- Vinithar
- Hunimund
- Thorismund
- Valamar
- Hungary 453-474
- Theodomar........................................
-471
- Serbia 474-475, Bulgaria 475-488,
Serbia-Croatia 488-489, Italy 489-553
- Theodoric
the Great............................471-526
- Athalric.......................................526-534
- Theodahad......................................534-536
- Witiges........................................536-540
- Theodobald.........................................540
- Eraric.............................................540
- Baduela........................................540-552
- Theia..........................................552-553
- Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy
conquered by the Byzantine Empire, 553.
- The TAURIC
OSTROGOTHS
- This was a small fragment of the
Ostrogothic people dwelling in the Crimean Peninsula, who establishing a
Kingdom there. They retained a great deal of local autonomy, both
religiously (through the episcopate of Doros) and politically (a
series of Gothic princes ruled from the fortress of Mangkup well into the
1500's)
- Sandil
(King of the Tetraxite Goths)...................500's
CE
- ?
- To the Avars....................................c.
560-c. 600
- To the Bulgars..................................c. 600-c.
650
- To the Khazars..................................c.
650-900's
- See Doros, a Bishopric and later
Principality near modern Sevastopol, for local leaders in this area, and
often of this people.
- To the Pechenegs.................................900's-mid
1000's
- To the Cumans...............................mid
1000's-1190's
- To Byzantine
Empire.............................1190's-1204
- To
Trebizond......................................1204-1250's
- To
Genoa........................................1250's-1320's
- To the Mongols (Golden Horde)...................1320's-1427
- To the Girai Khanate of Krym......................1427-1777
- In the early 1500's the line of the
Princes of Gothia comes to an end. Pockets of Gothic linguistic
communities, the last East Germanic speakers on earth, continued to exist
into the 1700's, when they vanished.
- The VISIGOTHS
- Bulgaria and Thrace, c. 268-c. 271
- Cannabas....................................c.
268-271
- Moldavia and Wallachia, c. 270-382
- ??
- Fritigern......................................fl.
376
- Bulgaria 382-395
- Greece 395-398, Albania 398-401,
Serbia-Croatia 401-406, Slovenia 406-408, Italy 408-410
- Alaric
I.......................................395-410
- Southern France 410-412, Spain
412-415
- Ataulf.........................................410-415
- Sigeric............................................415
- Aquitaine-Toulouse 415-508...
- Wallia.........................................415-418
- Theodoric
I....................................418-451
- Thorismund.....................................451-453
- ...and Spain again c. 460-712
- Theodoric
II...................................453-466
- Euric..........................................466-484
- Alaric
II......................................484-507
- Gesalic........................................507-511
d. 513: with...
- Amalric
(without power or influence 507-26)....507-531
with...
- Theodoric
the Great (K. of the Ostrogoths).....511-526
and...
- Theudis........................................511-548
- Theudegisel....................................548-549
- Agila..........................................549-554
- Athanagild.....................................554-568
- Leova
I........................................568-572 with...
- Leovigild......................................568-586
- Reccared
I.....................................586-601
- Leova
II.......................................601-603
- Witterich......................................603-610
- Gundemar.......................................610-612
- Sisebur........................................612-621
- Reccared
II........................................621
- Swinthila......................................621-631
- Sisenand.......................................631-636
- Chintila.......................................636-640
- Tulga..........................................640-642
- Chindaswinth...................................642-653
- Reccaswinth....................................653-672
- Wamba..........................................672-680
- Erwig..........................................680-687
- Egica..........................................687-701
- Witiza.........................................701-709
- Roderic........................................709-712
- Visigothic Kingdom destroyed by
invading Arabs from North Africa, 712.
HERMANDURI One of the
early tribes to emerge, they settled in central Germany during the early 1st
century, but had disappeared by around 200 CE. They are obscure, and I have
almost no names of any of their chieftains as yet. As the Alemanni
Confederation appeared in close to the same area the Hermanduri lived in, it is
reasonable to suppose that the Hermanduri, along with the Semnones, formed much
of the new Confederation. They were in their time perhaps the best-known
Germans among the Romans - Tacitus mentions that they were the only tribe to
carry on extensive trade with the Empire, and that individual Hermanduri were
the only Germans allowed into Roman cities without armed escorts. They are, in
fact, the tribe whose name the Romans adapted to describe the entire people -
Germanii.
- Vibil (Vibilius)...............................fl. 30's CE
HERULI A tribe
originating, apparently, in southern Scandinavia. They are reported to have
been driven out of Jutland or thereabouts sometime in the early 3rd century.
Thereafter, they wandered generally eastward, becoming over time more closely
associated with the Ostrogoths. They managed to sack Byzantium in 267, but
their eastern contingent was virtually annihilated at Nis two years later.
Serving first under the Goths, and later clients of the Huns, they re-emerged
in the second half of the 5th century, to form a confederation of tribes in
Italy and Austria. This Kingdom was destroyed by the Ostrogoths under
Theodoric, and thereafter Herulian fortunes waned. They disappear from
historical record by c. 550 CE.
- Jutland ? 1st cent. CE-c. 200 ?
- Vislaus............................................1st
cent. CE
- Vitalaus...........................................early
100's
- Alaric.........................................127-162
- Dietric........................................162-201
- The lower Elbe basin, c. 200-c. 250
?
- Teneric........................................201-237
- Migration southeastward, through
Silesia, Slovakia, and the Carpathians ?, c. 225-c. 260
- Romania-Bulgaria, c. 260-c. 275
- Subservient to the Ostrogoths...............c. 275-376
- Alberic................................c. 290-292
- Wisimer................................... ? -340
- To the Huns....................................376-453
- Miekislas.................................fl. 380's
- Italy and Austria, c. 470-493
- Odoacer
(either a Sciri or Rugian).............476-493
- Largely absorbed by the Ostrogoths,
493, but a remnant in southern Moravia continues for a time...
- South Moravia
- Rodulf......................................c.
500-c. 508
- Note also Sinduald, a rebel in
Trent, defeated by Narses and spoken of as being Herulian, c. 565
Note also - There has been a persistant story to the effect that a group of Heruli traveled back to their ancient homeland in Jutland in the 6th century, and from there migrated into Norway, and eventually to Iceland as that island's first settlers. There are shadowy comments in Procopius that lend some credence to this view, and a Scandinavian scholar in the first half of the 20th century (Bardi Gudmundsson) has evolved an extensively documented theory to this effect which, nevertheless, has not found much favour among other historians.
HUNDINGS A people
mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Widsith poem. They may be connected to Hunding, a
Saxon king mentioned in the Volsung Saga and other Norse sources, or to a
region in southeastern Bavaria by the same name.
- Hunding ? .....................................fl. c. 450 ?
- Mearchealf.....................................fl.
c. 500
INGVAEONES An early
Germanic proto-tribe, or cultural group. They dwelt in Jutland, Holstein, and
Frisia from some unknown time in the ancient past (perhaps 500 or 1000 BCE),
until the differentiation of localized Teutonic tribes (Frisians, Saxons,
Jutes, Angles) in that region circa 50 BCE.
IRMINONES An early Germanic
proto-tribe, or cultural group. They dwelt in eastern Germany, roughly between
the Elbe and Oder Rivers some unknown time in the ancient past (perhaps 500 or
1000 BCE), until the differentiation of localized Teutonic tribes (Lombards,
Marcomanni, Quadi) in that region circa 10 CE.
ISTVAEONES An early
Germanic proto-tribe, or cultural group. They dwelt around the Rhine and Weser
river systems from some unknown time in the ancient past (perhaps 500 or 1000
BCE), until the differentiation of localized Teutonic tribes (Chatti,
Hermanduri, Franks) in that region circa 250 CE.
LOMBARDS A large and
powerful tribe which emerged in the Oder basin. Drifting south, they became
enmeshed within the Huns, but continued their migration south afterwards until,
by the middle of the 6th century, they were poised on the edge of Italy. They
entered Italy in 568, and rapidly established themselves in a number of
autonomous Duchies throughout the peninsula - a larger Lombard Kingdom was also
established in northern and central Italy, which endured until the Carolingian
conquest of the late 8th century. Their name refers to their most noticeable
identifying characteristic: the "Longbeards".
- Along the Elbe, in northern Germany, c. 10 CE-c. 200
- Northeast Germany and northwest
Poland, c. 200-c. 400
- Ibo
with...
- Aio
- Eastern Germany and Moravia, c.
390's-c. 420's
- To the Huns.................................c. 400-453
- Agelmund...........................fl. c. 380–c. 410
- Lamissio..................................fl. c. 420
- Slovakia c. 425-c. 550
- Lethu..............................fl. c. 420–c. 460
- Hildehoc.......................................fl.
c. 470
- Godehoc........................................fl.
c. 480
- Claffo.........................................fl.
c. 500
- Tato...........................................fl.
c. 510
- Wacho...................................fl.
c. 510–c. 540
- Hungary, c. 540-568
- Waltari.....................................c.
540–546
- AUDOINING
- Audoin.........................................546–c.
565
- Italy 568-774
- Alboin......................................c.
565-572
- Clef...........................................572-575
- "Rule of the Dukes": an
interregnum characterized by autonomous local Lombard governors.
- Authari........................................584-590
- BAVARI
- Theodelinda
(fem.)
(Regent 616-626).............590-591
d. 628
- Theodelinda is of great
significance in Western culture. The daughter of a Duke of the Bavarii,
she was married first to Authari and when he died, was allowed to pick (as
her next husband, Agilulf) his successor. She thereafter exerted much
influence in restoring Athanasian Christianity (that is to say, the
ancestor of modern Roman Catholicism) to a position of primacy in Italy
against it's rival, Arian Christianity. With a stable base in Italy
thereafter, the Papacy could begin subduing those it regarded as heretics
elsewhere.
- AUDOINING
- Agilulf........................................591-616
- Adaloald.......................................616-626
- Arioald........................................626-636
- Rothari........................................636-652
- Aripert
I......................................652-661
- Grimoald.......................................662-671
- Garibald.......................................671-674
- Perctarit......................................674-688
- Aripert
II.....................................688-700
- Luitprand......................................701-744
- Ratchis........................................744-749
- Aistulf........................................749-756
- Daufer.........................................756-774
- To the Carolingian Franks, 774
MARCOMANNI One of the
earlier tribes to emerge out of the general Teutonic North, in roughly the end of
the 1st century BCE-beginning of the 1st century CE. They are not exceptionally
well documented, and I have only a few names from among their chieftains at
this time.
- Coalesced as a tribe in what is now the Czech Republic (Bohemia), c. 10 CE-c. 380
- Marbod...........................................6-19
CE d. 37
- Catualda........................................19-c.
25
- ??
- Ballomar................................late
160's-170's
- ?
- Attalus........................................mid
200's
- ??
- Disrupted and vanished in the
sudden shifting of populations that took place upon the onslaught of the
Huns in roughly 375-400 CE. Survivors presumably found refuge among
Rugians, Suevians, Vandals, and Alemanni. Note however a record of a
"Queen Fritigil" a woman spoken of as ruler of the Marcomanni as
late as c. 500.
MYRGINGS A people
mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Widsith poem. They were the
enemies of the Angles under King Offa and probably lived near them in southern
and central Jutland and northern Germany.
- Meaca..........................................fl. c. 500
- ??
- Eadgils........................................fl.
c. 700 ?
QUADI A smaller
Germanic tribe about which little definitive information is known. They emerged
as an element in the earlier migrations southward that took place near the
beginning of the 1st century CE., alongside the more numerous Marcomanni, who
they were probably closely related to. They were settled in what is now Moravia
and western Slovakia from roughly 40 CE onward. Their frontiers for the next
350 years or more were the Marcomanni to the west, proto-Slavic tribes to the
north, Sarmatian Iazgyians and (later) Asding Vandals to the east, and the
Roman Empire to the south.
- Tudrus.........................................fl. c. 6 BCE
- Vannius...................................c.
25 CE-50 d. aft. 50
- Wangio..........................................50-
? with...
- Sido............................................50-
?
- ?
- Appointee of Antoninus Pius, name unknown......fl. c. 140
- Another King, name unknown..................... ? -167
- Furtius........................................167-
?
- Ariogaesus
(deposed, banished to Egypt)........
? -174
- Furtius
(restored ?)...........................174- ?
- Gaiobomar......................................
? -215
- ??
- Disrupted and vanished in the
sudden shifting of populations that took place upon the onslaught of the
Huns in roughly 380-400 CE. Survivors presumably found refuge among
Rugians, Suevians, Vandals, and Alemanni.
RUGIANS An eastern
tribe who began moving south into the Silesian uplands in avoidance of
burgeoning Balt expansion. They eventually settled on the edge of the Steppes,
but were absorbed by the advancing Huns. Re-emerging from the retreating Huns
some 50 or 60 years later, they found themselves in a position to settle
Bohemia, recently vacated by the Marcomanni.
- Northern Poland, c. 10 CE-c. 200
- Silesia and the Carpathians, c.
200-c. 300
- Galitzia, c. 300-c. 400
- To the Huns, c. 390-453
- Re-emerge as a separate entity, in Bohemia,
453-c. 500.
- Flactitheus.................................c.
440-c. 470 >
- Fava
(Feletheus)......................... < c. 470-c. 488
- Friedrich...................................c.
488-c. 493
- Malesclot
?
- Hagena
(Hogni).................................fl. c. 500
- Disappear once more, to be replaced
by (or perhaps simply reorganized as...) the Bavarii.
SAXONS An important
tribe dwelling in northwestern Germany, and forming a ramshackle state during
the Dark Ages. They were first mentioned by the Classical geographer Ptolemy in
the 2nd century, and it is likely that they coalesced out of the early tribal
group located in that region. They expanded their influence to cover the entire
region and, with the withdreawal of the legions in the 5th century, began raids
down the North Sea coast, but especially on the island of Britain. In the late
5th, 6th, and early 7th centuries, large numbers of Saxons crossed the seas and
established a variety of Kingdoms in Britain, alongside Scandinavian raiders
intent on the same business (Angli and Jutes). Those Saxons who remained on the
continent fell into protracted and ultimately devastating conflict with the
Franks, who eventually annexed the entire region.
- Vegdegg Odinson.................................c. 1st century CE ?
- Gelder
- Freawine..................................mid-late
300's
- Guictglis......................................fl.
400's
- Hulderic.......................................mid
500's
- Alof
the Great (fem.).......................fl.
mid 500's
- Boddic.......................................early
600's
- Berthold
- Sighard
- Dietrich
- Wernicke.......................................mid
700's
- Withukund
the Great........................... ? -777 d. 785
- To the Carolingian Empire......................777-778
- Withukund
the Great (restored).................778-785
- To the Carolingian Empire......................785-790
- Rebellion......................................790-804
- To the Carolingian Empire......................804-843
- To Germany thereafter. Northwestern
Germany organized as the Duchy of Saxony from c. 880.
SCIRI (Schiri, Skiri) A small
tribe about which not much is known - they were evidently clients or associates
of the Heruli, and perhaps the Ostrogoths.
- To the Huns previous to 454.
- Middle Danube
- Edika..........................................fl.
454
- Odoacer
(also K. of the Heruli 476-493)........
? -493
- To the Ostrogoths and/or Lombards
thereafter...
SEMNONES An obscure
tribe about which I have very little information. They appear to have been a
subgroup of the Suevi, and dwelt in the bulk of what once was East Germany at
roughly the time of Arminius (c. 10 CE). They remained in about that location
for the remainder of their identifiable existence. They disappear about 200 CE,
being replaced in that region quite soon after by the Alemanni Confederation -
it is reasonable to assume that many Alemanni had been Semnones, therefore.
- East Germany, 1st cent. BCE-c. 200 CE
- Masyus.............................................late
100's CE
SUEVI A complex
group of closely related tribes existing from at least the 1st century CE, the
group that the list refers to began it's career fleeing for it's life from
advancing Huns, during the rapid population shift that occured when the Huns
suddenly enveloped the Ostrogothic Empire and continued marching into central
and western Europe. Once in relative safety in Gaul, the Suevi continued to
migrate in close proximity to the Vandals, and eventually settled in Galicia
province of Spain, where they organized a fairly stable state.
- North-central Germany, 1st cent. BCE-c. 300/75
- Hungary, c. 375-406
- Gaul 406-409
- Northwest Spain 409-585
- Hermeric.......................................409-aft.
441 with...
- Rechila
I......................................438-448
- Rechiar
I......................................448-456
- Aioulf.........................................456-457
- Maldras.....................................c.
457-c. 460 with...
- Framta......................................c.
457-c. 460
- Richimund
(in the North)....................c.
460-c. 464 with...
- Frumar
(in the South).......................c.
460-c. 463
- Remismund......................................464-483
- It isn't clear from what sources
exist whether Richimund and Remismund are two separate individuals or the same
person with variant spellings of his name.
- Rechila
II ?................................c. 483-490
- It is widely thought that
"Rechila II" may be a spurious name, an invention of early
chroniclers.
- Vermund
?
- Rechiar
II ?
- Theodemund..................................c.
520-c. 550
- Carriaric...................................c.
550-559
- Ariamir........................................559-561
- Theodemar......................................561-570
- It is thought by some that Ariamir and
Theodemar may be the same person, though others regard them as brothers.
- Miro...........................................570-582
- Eboric.........................................582-584
- Andeca.........................................584-585
- Amalarich..........................................585
- Amalarich fought the Visigoths, but
was defeated by them before he could formally be installed as King of the
Suevi.
- To the Visigoths, 585...
TEUTONS The term
"Teuton" has from long usage come to refer to the entire ethnoi of
Germanic peoples inhabiting the northern verge of Europe from perhaps as early
as 2000 BCE. The word derives from Proto-Germanic Þeudanōz and,
in this model, is not so much a particular tribe or nation as it is the
cultural hearth out of which all the various Germanic peoples emerged, either
directly or at some remove. This label is given to a group of local peoples who
inhabited for ages portions of what is known now as Scandinavia - specifically,
central and southern Norway, central and southern Sweden, Denmark, and
districts in Germany immediately adjacent to Denmark and the Baltic.
Here, for whatever it may be worth, is a brief framework of the legendary
accounts associated with these earliest times. Nevertheless, note the second
section within this article for an account of the early nation which seems to
be the source of the term "Teutonicus" in Latin.
- The Germanic (Deutches) peoples seem to have emerged from out of the area surrounding the Skagerrak - the estuary of the Baltic into the North Atlantic; i.e Denmark, southern Norway, and southwestern Sweden. Identifiably Germanic characteristics begin to emerge after roughly 2000 BCE, and a stable culture in the region is established which endures for better than 2200 years. Their own earliest mythologies speak of two antagonistic groups, the Æsir and the Vanir - the former a group obsessed with the cult of the warrior and the martial virtues, the latter seeming to be focussed on land-use and fertility cults. The Æsir seem to have predominated eventually, but at considerable cost - the legends suggest, in fact, that they were brought to their knees and had to negotiate a compromise with the Vanir. These legends also speak at length regarding conflicts with peoples collectively called "Frost-Giants", who are said to dwell across the sea, in the East. In the context of modern archeology, this would be a fairly clear reference to ancient Balts of the Battle-Axe Culture, and their neighbours the Finns, who once occupied most of northwestern Russia.
- From about 100 BCE to after 250 CE,
groups of Germanic peoples began migrating southward into central and
southern Europe. Coming in contact with literate civilizations, names of
tribes and names of specific rulers begin to emerge, and form the bulk of
this file. Those folk remaining in the north begin coalescing into
identifiable tribal nations after about 350 CE, and are detailed more
particularly in my file on Scandinavia.
- TEUTON As
indicated above, the term "Teuton" has been applied to the
entire Germanic branch of Indo-European peoples, but it should be noted
that it also seems to have been the name of a particular tribe. The
Teutons as a specific tribe seem to have been based originally in northern
Jutland, where a district, Thy, still memorializes their name. At some
point in the 2nd Century BCE, the began migrating southward, up the Oder,
into Silesia, and across Slovakia into what would nowadays be modern
Austria and Slovenia.. There they encountered Romans, fought them,
wandered west into Gaul, crossed for a time into Spain, before returning
to Gaul and Austria, and were finally brought down by Gaius Marius in 101
BCE. During these wanderings, they were in close contact, perhaps even
confederation, with the Cimbri, although the two
nations split up before the final battles with Marius.
- Teutobod.......................................
? -101 BCE
THURINGII A late occuring
tribe which appeared in the highlands of central Germany, a region which still
bears their name to this day - Thuringia. They evidentally filled a void left
when the previous inhabitants - the Alemanni Confederation - migrated south. It
is unclear whether they were stay-at-home Alemanni, or simply a lesser tribe
that was in the right place at the right time.
- Central Germany - Harz Mountain region, c. 280-c. 550
- Widephus...........................................late
300's
- To the Huns.................................c. 450-c. 455
- Bisin.......................................mid
to late 400's
- Berthar............................................late
400's
- Hermanafrid...................................fl.
early 500's with...
- Amalberga
(fem.)
- Conquered by the Franks, c. 550
- Radulf.......................................631/2- ?
TUNGRI A Germanic tribe living in eastern Gaul. Their
capital was called Atuatuca, located in the modern Limburg province of Belgium.
The Tungri were mentioned in the Notitia Dignitatum, an early fifth-century
document, in which was transcribed every military and governmental post in the
late Roman Empire. The document mentions the Tribune of the First Cohort of
Tungri stationed along Hadrian's Wall at Vercovicium (now known as Housesteads,
Northumberland) for the purpose of interdicting northern tribesmen from seeking
residence or criminal activity in settled Britannia.
- Campanus............................................fl. 71 with...
- Juvenalis...........................................fl.
71
UBII A tribe
from the Rhine valley; they were allies of Julius Caesar and appear to have
survived as Roman foederatii into the 4th century.
- Bacurius................................................late 300's CE
VANDALS One of the
best-known of the Germanic tribes, in the use of their name to epitomize the
Barbarian, if nothing else. This East German folk emerged out of the northern
Carpathians in the 3rd century, and quickly split into two separate but closely
related peoples, the Asdings and Silings. The Asdings eventually established a
fairly stable Kingdom in the western Mediterranean, but both peoples
disappeared in the Dark Ages. Their name lives on though, and not merely as an
adjective. The name of Siling is recalled in their original homeland of
Silesia, and the occupation of western Spain by both elements established the
territorial name of Vandalusia, remembered in slightly abbreviated form
(Andalusia, Arabic al-Andalus) even today.
- Poland ?, from before 200 CE
- Rapt........................................fl.
c. 171
- Rag.........................................fl.
c. 180
- The Asding Vandals
- Eastern Hungary, < 240 CE-406
- Argait......................................fl.
c. 235
- Gunteric.......................................fl.
248
- Crocus.........................................fl.
260's
- Visimar..................................fl.
early 300's
- ?
- Gondegusulus................................c.
380-406
- Gaul 406-410, Northwestern Spain
and Northern Portugal 409-429
- Gunderic.......................................406-428
- North Africa (modern
Algeria-Tunisia), Sardinia, and Corsica 429-534
- Gaiseric.......................................428-477
- Huneric........................................477-484
- Gunthamund.....................................484-496
- Thrasamund.....................................496-523
- Hilderic.......................................523-531
- Gelimer........................................531-534
- North African Vandals conquered by
the Byzantine Empire, 534.
- The Siling Vandals
- South and southwestern Poland, <
240 CE-406
- Gaul 406-409
- Spain 409-417
- Fredbal.........................................
< 415
- Ruler or rulers, name(s) unknown...............415-417
- Merged with the Visigoths, 417.
WARNI A people
evidently dwelling in northeastern Germany, about whom I have very little
information - presumably they were clients of the Saxons, the dominant Germanic
people of the region in the time specified below.
- Mecklenburg
- Billing........................................fl.
c. 500
- Billing is mentioned in the
Anglo-Saxon poem Widsith.
- Hermegisl
(Ermengist)..........................fl. c. 540
- Radigis
(Radiger)..............................fl. mid 500's
- According to Procopius, Radigis was
betrothed to a sister or daughter of an Anglian king from Britain, but
jilted her in favor of a Frankish marriage alliance. "She accordingly
collected four hundred ships and ... she in person led forth this
expedition against the Varni." Radigis was fortunate; upon being
captured he was forced to make good on his marriage offer rather than
executed.
**************************************************
Go
to: Germany -
Introduction
Go
to: German Indices
Go
to: German Kreisen
Table
Go
to: German Free
Cities
Go
to: German States A-E
Go
to: German States F-H
Go
to: German States I-M
Go
to: German States N-R
Go
to: German States S
Go
to: German States T-Z
Go
to: Imperial
Ecclesiastic States: Archbishops
Go
to: Imperial
Ecclesiastic States: Bishops A-F
Go
to: Imperial
Ecclesiastic States: Bishops H-P
Go
to: Imperial
Ecclesiastic States: Bishops R-W
Go
to: Imperial
Ecclesiastic States: Abbacies and Convents
*****
Go
to Central Europe (Austria,
Czech Rep., Switzerland, etc.)
Go
to France
Go
to the Low Countries
Go
to Poland and the
Baltics
Go
to Scandinavia
Wisigoths
Les Wisigoths (en allemand Westgoten, ou Goths de
l’Ouest, ou encore Tervinges) étaient un peuple germanique
d’origine scandinave, issu de
Alors qu’ils occupaient l’ancienne province
romaine de Dacie depuis la fin du IIIe siècle, les Wisigoths ont
adopté peu à peu l’arianisme, à partir de
l’année 341, c’est-à-dire une branche du
christianisme qui affirme que Jésus-Christ n’est pas Dieu, mais un
être distinct créé directement par ce dernier. Cette
croyance était en opposition totale avec la croyance chrétienne
qui était majoritaire dans l’empire romain et qui plus tard
s’est scindée en catholicisme et orthodoxie. Les Wisigoths sont
restés fidèles à l’hérésie arienne
officiellement jusqu’en 589, lorsque le roi Récarède Ier
(en espagnol : Recaredo) choisit de se convertir publiquement, faisant
ainsi joindre officiellement l’Église catholique au royaume
wisigothique d’Espagne. Toutefois, après cette date, un fort parti
arien demeura fort actif et influent, notamment dans la noblesse. Il en sera
encore question au début du VIIIe siècle dans les derniers jours
du royaume.
Les Wisigoths cités par Pythéas après
son expédition dans le Grand Nord en -327, sont apparus pour la
première fois dans l’Histoire en tant que peuple distinct en
l’an 235, quand ils envahirent et dévastèrent
Au cours des trois années suivantes, ils furent
repoussés au-delà du Danube par une série de campagnes
militaires menées par l’empereur Claude II le Gothique, le futur
empereur Aurélien étant le commandant de la cavalerie. Cependant,
ils purent se maintenir en Dacie, qu’Aurélien fit évacuer
en 271, transférant la population vers une nouvelle province créée
au sud du Danube sous le nom de Dacia Ripensis.
Ils y restèrent établis jusqu’en 376,
lorsqu’un de leurs deux chefs, l’arien Fritigern, fit appel
à l’empereur romain Valens et lui demanda l’autorisation de
pouvoir s’installer sur les berges Sud du Danube, afin de se
protéger des Huns, incapables de traverser en force ce large fleuve.
Valens accorda sa permission et aida même les
Wisigoths à traverser le Danube. En retour, Fritigern dut fournir des
mercenaires pour l’armée romaine.
Mais, l’année suivante, une famine
éclata sur les terres occupées par les Wisigoths et les
gouverneurs romains de leurs territoires les traitèrent cruellement.
Comme Valens ne répondait pas aux appels à l’aide de
Fritigern, celui-ci prit les armes. La guerre qui s’ensuivit se termina
le 9 août 378 lors de la bataille d’Andrinople où Valens
mourut. Fritigern, victorieux, fut reconnu comme roi par son peuple et les
Wisigoths devinrent la principale puissance des Balkans.
Le successeur de l’empereur Valens, Théodose
Ier, conclut la paix avec Fritigern en 379. Le traité fut respecté
jusqu’à la mort de Théodose en 395. Cette même
année, Alaric Ier, le plus célèbre des rois Wisigoths,
monta sur le trône, alors qu’à l’empereur
Théodose succédaient ses deux fils incapables : Arcadius en
Orient et Honorius en Occident.
Au cours des quinze années suivantes les conflits
furent entrecoupés par des années d’une paix vacillante
entre Alaric et les puissants généraux germaniques qui
commandaient les armées romaines.
Mais, après l’assassinat du
général d’origine vandale Stilicon (Stillicho) par Honorius
en 408 et après le massacre des familles de 30 000 soldats wisigoths
servant dans l’armée romaine, Alaric déclara la guerre. Il
fut bientôt aux portes de Rome, et devant le refus d’Honorius de
négocier, les Wisigoths pillèrent la ville le 24 août 410.
Cet événement frappa considérablement les esprits des
contemporains, et sert parfois comme événement final de
l’Antiquité.
* 235 : Début des invasions des Goths, qui
dévastent
* 258 : Les Goths se séparent en Ostrogoths et
Wisigoths.
* 269 : Victoire sur les Goths de l’empereur
Claude II (Claude le Gothique) à Naissus (Aujourd’hui, Niš,
en Serbie).
* 332 : Ariaric, roi des Wisigoths, lance une attaque
contre les Sarmates de la plaine, par la vallée du Maros, mais subit une
défaite totale face aux Romains, accourus au secours des Sarmates
* 341 : Les premiers Wisigoths sont convertis
à l’arianisme par l’évêque Ulfila.
* 369 : L’empereur romain Valens force le roi
des Wisigoths Athanaric à reculer dans les Serrorum Montes (Carpates du
Sud-Est) et à accepter un traité qui lui est peu favorable sur la
frontière du Danube.
* 370 : Naissance d’Alaric Ier, futur roi des
Wisigoths.
* 376 : L’armée wisigothe,
dirigée par Athanaric est mise en déroute par les Huns aux abords
du Dniestr. Les Wisigoths qui occupent une partie de
* 378 : L’empereur Valens est défait et
tué par les Wisigoths à Andrinople.
* 380 : Athanaric et sa suite se réfugient
à Constantinople.
* 396 : Début du règne d’Alaric
Ier, roi des Wisigoths.
* 401 : Les Wisigoths envahissent l’Italie.
* 402 : Les Wisigoths sont battus par le
général romain d’origine vandale Stilicon et
rejettés hors d’Italie.
* 402 : Pour échapper à la menace des
Wisigoths, la cour impériale est à nouveau déplacée
de Milan à Ravenne, un site plus facile à défendre.
* 410 : Les Wisigoths conduits par Alaric prennent et
pillent Rome durant trois jours. Décès à la fin de
l’année d’Alaric près de Cosenza en Calabre, alors
qu’il espérait s’embarquer pour
* 412 Les Wisigoths et leur nouveau roi Athaulf,
beau-frère d’Alaric, entrent en Gaule, ruinée par les
invasions des années 407/409
* 416 : Les Wisigoths et leur roi Wallia continuent
leur invasion en Espagne, où ils sont envoyés à la solde
de Rome pour combattre d’autres Barbares.
* 418 : Les Wisigoths y exterminent la tribu vandale
des Silings et tuent leur roi Frédébal, les Alains, battent et
repoussent les « Suèves » en Galice, et les
vandales Asdings. Les Wisigoths obtiennent de Rome des terres en Aquitaine et
le statut officiel de fédéré.
* 429 : Aetius, vainqueur des Wisigoths et des Francs
est nommé commandant des armées de l’empire
d’Occident.
* 451 : Attila, roi des Huns, envahit
* 455 : Début du règne d’Avitus,
empereur romain d’Occident, porté au pouvoir par les Wisigoths
(fin en 456).
* 456 : Le puissant roi suève Réchiaire
Ier est défait et tué par les Wisigoths qui commencent à
avoir la haute main sur l’Espagne.
* 468 : Victoire des Wisigoths sur les Suèves
en Lusitanie (Portugal actuel) qui devient partie intégrante de
l’"Empire wisigothique".
* 475 : Les Wisigoths contrôlent maintenant le
Sud-Ouest de
* 476 : Euric achève la conquête du
reste du Sud de
* 506 : L’église des Wisigoths tient un
synode et leur roi Alaric II tente un rapprochement tardif avec les catholiques.
Alaric II promulgue un code de lois pour ses sujets Gallo-romains, le
Bréviaire d’Alaric, inspiré du Code de Théodose.
* 507 : Allié à Gondebaud, le roi des
Burgondes, le roi franc Clovis Ier défait les Wisigoths à
Vouillé et tue Alaric II. Les Wisigoths sont repoussés vers
l’Espagne.
* 508 : Intervention en Gaule des troupes
ostrogothiques envoyées par le roi Théodoric Ier qui repoussent
les armées burgondes et franques assiégeant la cité
d’Arles et sauvent les Wisigoths de l’extermination. Le roi
Geisalic, élu par l’armée après la défaite de
Vouillé, est chassé sur ordre de Théodoric qui installe
son petit-fils Amalaric.
* 525 : Théodoric le Grand emprisonne le pape
après son échec comme médiateur entre les Wisigoths et
Byzance.
* 541 : Les Francs attaquent le royaume des Wisigoths
au Nord de l’Espagne mais sont repoussés à Saragosse.
* 554 : Début du règne
d’Athanagild Ier (fin en 567), appuyé par Byzance contre son
prédécesseur Agila Ier.
* 585 : Le grand roi Léovigild achève
la conquête du royaume des « Suèves » au
Nord-Ouest de l’Espagne et rèussit en partie l’union de la
péninsule ibérique (considéré en Espagne comme le
premier « Unificador National »).
* 586 : Décès de Léovigild,
dernier roi officiel arien des Wisigoths, et début du règne de
son second fils Récarède Ier (fin en décembre 601).
* 587 : Récarède Ier annonce sa
conversion au catholicisme.
* 589 : Récarède Ier impose le
catholicisme à ses sujets au concile de Tolède et met ainsi fin
officiellemnt à l’arianisme qui n’est plus toléré
dans le royaume wisigothique.
* 612 : Début du règne de Sisebuth (fin
en 621). 1ère loi religieuse contre l’arianisme persistant.
* 654 : Le roi Recceswinth promulgue un code
inspiré du droit romain instituant une totale parité entre ses
sujets (Lex wisigothorum).
* 672 : Décès de Recceswinth,
élection de Wamba, dernier grand roi wisigoth.
* 681 : Le comte Flavius Ervigius (Ervige), supplante
Wamba et prend le pouvoir.
* 687 : Début du règne du roi
Égica.
* 694 : Grandes persécutions contre les Juifs
du Sud de la péninsule, jugés complices des musulmans
d’Afrique du Nord.
* 709 : Déposition du roi Wittiza par
Rodéric. Guerre civile.
Vandal
Anar a :navigacion,Recercar
Los Vandals
pilhant Roma, per Heinrich Leutemann (1824-1904)
Los vandals èran un pòble indoeuropèu
de la familha germanica que abitava dins las regions riberencas de la mar Baltica (dins
la zona de las actualas Alemanha e Polonha) en Euròpa centrala.
Somari
[amagar] |
Origina dels
vandals [modificar]
Los lugions o vandals ocupavan lo territòri a l'oèst
del flume de Vistula e al cant de l'Oder, fins al nòrd
de Boèmia. Lo mot de vandal sembla aver doas significacions: vòl
dire "los que càmbian" e "los abils"; mentre que lor
autre nom, lugis o lugions,
a tanben una significacion doble: vòl dire messorguièrs e
confederats. Sembla èsser qu'al començament las tribús
dels vandulis (o vandalis) e la dels lugis (o lugions), amassa amb las dels
silinges, omans, burs, varins (segurament nomenats tanben auarins), diduns, elvecons,
aris o charins, manimis (benlèu una denominacion varia d'omans), elisis
e naarvals correspondián a de grops pichons d'origina similara (encara
que es pas segur que totas las tribús foguèsson de la meteissa
origina) e integravan una branca del grop dels ermions (de la meteissa manièra
que los sueus e lors tribús pròchas),
e se formè apuèi un grand grop identificat generalament coma
lugions, que lor nom designava totes los pòbles components, inclús
los vandals. Apuèi (cap al sègle II dC)
s'utilizèt lo nom de vandals per l'ensemble de pòbles. Mai
d'un pòble cèlta coma los osen o los cotins entrèt al grop
dels lugions. L'arribada dels gòts los
desplaçèt cap al sud e s'establiguèron en riba de laMar Negra; doncas foguèron de vesins, e de còps
d'aliats, dels gòts. Pendent lo sègle I dC, las tribús
del grop dels lugions o lugis (inclús las tribús de la branca
dels vandals), foguèron frequentament en guèrra contra
los sueus e los quads, en formar partida de còps
una aliança amb autras tribús, especialament los ermundurs. Al mièg
del sègle venquèron un rei sueu, e en 84 dC sosmetèron
temporalament los quads. Pendent una partida d'aqueste sègle e al
seguent, s'amassèron las divèrsas tribús de lugions e
devenguèron un grop màger conegut coma vandals. En temps de las Guèrras
Marcomanas predomina ja la denominacion de vandals, e apareisson dividits en
grops desparièrs: los silinges, los lacrings e los victòvals,
aquestes darrièrs governats pel linhatge dels Astings o Asdings, que lor
nom evòca lor cabeladura longa.
Amb los longobards,
los lacrings e los victòvals o victofalis crotzèron Danubi cap a 167
e demandèron de s'establir en Panónia. Los Asdings o Victòvals,
dirigits par Rao e Rapte (noms que son traduches coma *tuèu e *biga),
foguèron pas admetuts en Panònia (ont s'èran establits los longobards e los lacrings), doncas avancèron
cap a 171 en direccion de la zona mejana de la region de las Carpatas pendent
las Guèrras Marcomanas, e d'acòrd amb los romans s'installèron
dins la termièra nòrd
de Dacia.
Apuèi s'aproprièron la Dacia occidentala. Sembla que los vandals
quedèron dividits unicament en asdings (o victòvals) e silinges,
e que la tribú dels lacrings despareissèt barrejada entre *andús
grops e amb los longobards al sègle III. A partir de 275, los asdings s'afrontèron
amb los gòts per
la possession del Banat (abandonat per Roma), mentre que los
silinges, segurament jos la pression dels gòts, abandonèron lors implantaments en Silèsia e
migrèron amb los burgundis e s'establiguèron dins la zona de Men.
Lors atacs contra Rètia foguèron refusats per *Probe. Lo rei
asding Wisumarh (Wisumar) combatèt contra los gòts provenents
de l'èst comandats per Geberic, qu'ataquèron lors territòris.
Wisumarh moriguèt dins la lucha contra los gòts e
los integrants de las tribús de vandals que se volguèron pas
sometre als gòts passèron
en territòri imperial, e s'establiguèron en Panònia, ont
tanben s'establiguèron los quads. Al començament del sègle
V avián abandonat Panònia (coma tanben los quads) e se junhèron
als sueus e als alans per tal d'ocupar las Gàllias. Dins las primièras luchas de l'an 406
moriguèt lo rei Godegisel. Paucs ans apuèi los dos grops vandals acabèron
fusionats. Arribèron a Espanhaen 409 dC, ont s'establiguèron coma federats.
Sembla èsser que los silinges donèron lor nom a Silèsia
(derivat de Silíngia) e los vandals en general lo donèron a
Andalosia ("Vandalusia"). Un ducat de Pomerània portèt
ancianament lo nom de Vandàlia.
Entrada en
Espanha [modificar]
Los vandals
dins la Peninsula Iberica al sègle V
Los pas dels Pirenèus èran defenduts en 408 pels
fraires Didim e Verian, amb de tropas compausadas per de colons, esclaus e
trabalhadors, qu'èran pagadas per els los meteisses, mas aguèron
de s'afrontar amb las fòrças de Constantin III, proclamat
emperaire en Britània e en Gàllia, dirigidas pel filh de
l'emperaire, Constant, que après èsser nomenat cèsar per
son paire, èra estat nomenat tanben august e aviá recebut lo govèrn
d'Ispània. La peticion d'ajuda dels dos poguèt pas èsser
atenguda per l'emperaire Onori que se limitèt a enviar una letra en
encoratjant los defendeires, e los dos fraires foguèron derrotats e
Constantin III foguèt reconegut coma august per Onori. Constant designèt
coma comandant de las fòrças que defendián los pas pirenencs al
general Geronci, mas lo volguèt destituïr rapidament, e Geronci se
revoltèt e proclamèt emperaire son amic Maxim. Geronci daissèt
los pas pirenencs, derrotèt Constant, que executèt, e anèt
contra Constantin III a Arlés, que foguèt *assetjada, mas foguèt
derrotat quand Constantin recebèt de renfortiments d'Onori, e fugiguèt
en Ispània (409), ont se soicidèt. Constantin III e son filh
Julian s'autregèron a las fòrças d'Onori dirigidas per
Constanci, e portats a Ravena ont foguèron assassinats en 411. Las fòrças
de Geronci, majoritàriament barbaras, volguèron pas o poguèron
pas evitar lo passatge dels vandals dirigits per Godigisclus, que veniá
tanben amb los alans e los sueus (409). Aqueles darrièrs
foguèron los primièrs que crosèron los pas occidentals e
s'establiguèron en Astúrias e
en Galícia; los vandals èran devesits en dos grops,
los asdings e los silinges; los primièrs, que crossèron los Pirenèus centrals,
anèron cap a Saragossa e puèi
a [Clúnia] e s'establiguèron dins la region de Salamanca; los alans (que foguèron lo pòble mai
nombrós) s'establiguèron al sud dels precedents, en Lusitània;
e los vàndals silinges s'establiguèron en Betica. Lo territòri
dels vandals asdinges, crosat pel riu Duero, foguèt ambicionat pels
alans e pels sueus, que l'ataquèron, e los asdinges se desplacèron
alavetz cap al nòrd, a tèrras dels asturs e al nòrd de Galícia
(414) mentre que los alans ocupèron
Lo reialme
vandal en 455.
A la prima de 429, los vandals, comandats per lor rei Genseric, decidiguèron
de passar en Africa amb l'intencion de s'apropriar las zonas agricòlas
melhoras. Per aquò atenhèron de vaissèls que'n crossèron
l'estrech de
Gibartar e arribèron
a Tanger e a Ceuta. Se desplacèron puèi cap l'èst, e atenhèron,
après mantun ans de lucha, lo contraròtle de l'Africa romana e controtlèron
la màger fònt de produccion de gran de l'empèri vielh, que
tre aquel moment aguèt de crompar lo gran als vandals, e suportar lors ràzzias
dins lamar Mediterranèa occidentala, a travèrs lo pòrt
de Cartage e la flòta imperiala que i avián
capturada. Genseric atenhèt s'apoderar de basas maritimas de valor
estrategica granda per tal de controtlar lo comèrci maritim
de la mar Mediterranèa occidentala: las Illas Balearas, Còrsega, Sardenha e Sicília.
Lo contraròtle vandal del nòrd d'Africa durèt
un pauc mai d'un sègle e se caracterizèt per un afebliment
militar progressiu de l'armada vandala, una incapacitat granda de lors reis e
aristocràcia cortesana per trapar un modus
vivendi acceptable amb los
grops dirigents romans...
L'EMPIRE WISIGOTH
LE
ROYAUME WISIGOTHIQUE DE TOULOUSE (419-507)
WALLIA,
ROI DES WISIGOTHS (415-418), L'INSTALLATION EN AQUITAINE
En passant le Danube et pénétrant dans l'Empire Romain, la
société wisigothique s'était transformé d'une
société agricole et pastorale en une armée errante au
service des empereurs les plus offrants. Après avoir pillé Rome
(410), Les Wisigoths obtiennent de l'Empereur Honorius le droit de s'établir dans le
Sud-Ouest de
Wallia est porté
au pouvoir en 415. Il renvoit Galla
Placidia [Orose, histoire contre les
païens, VII, 43, 12], ex-épouse du roiAthaulf (410-415), en Italie en échange
de 600 000 boisseaux de blé fournis par l'Empire romain aux Wisigoths.
Il est principalement chargé de combattre les barbares qui se sont
installés dans la péninsule ibérique (suèves,
alains et vandales)[Orose, histoire
contre les païens, VII, 43, 13]. En 416, Wallia pénètre
en Espagne et bat sévèrement les cavaliers alains qui échappent de peu à
l'extermination totale. Les Suèves sont forcés de se replier en
Galice tandis que l'une des deux principales tribus vandales (Sillings) est durement atteinte et
contrainte de s'allier à la tribu rivale (Asdings).
THEODORIC
Ier, ROI DES WISIGOTHS (418-451)
THEODORIC
II, ROI DES WISIGOTHS (453-466)
Théodoric II est le fils et successeur du roi Théodoric Ier.
Toujours fidèle à la romanité, il lance une offensive
contre les Suèves avec l’appui romain. Ils s’emparent de Braga (Portugal),
Palencia et Mérida (Emerita Augusta) en Espagne. C’est le
premier pas des Wisigoths en Portugal. Cette conquête sera reprise et
terminée par son frère et successeur Euric. Il meurt
égorgé par ce-dernier, en 466, qui lui reprochait d'être
trop romanisé. Ce faisant, par ces conquêtes et ces exploits
militaires, les Wisigoths de Toulouse apparaissent aux yeux du monde occidental
comme la seule puissance organisée et solide face à la décrépitude
du pouvoir impérial romain.
Source : La culture latine de Théodoric II
Le Royaume
wisigothique aux environs de l'an 500
EURIC,
ROI DES WISIGOTHS (466-484)
Son œuvre pour le royaume wisigothique est grande : il porte les
frontières du royaume presque jusqu'à
LE
ROYAUME WISIGOTHIQUE DE TOLEDE (554-711)
Suite
à l'assaut franc et la défaite de Vouillé (507), le
royaume wisigothique se replie derrière les Pyrénées et
transfert sa capitale de Toulouse à Narbonne, à Barcelone. Le Roi
Athanagild l'installe définitivement à Tolède en 554.
Le
royaume wisigothique aux environs de l'an 540.
LEOVIGILD,
ROI DES WISIGOTHS (567-586)
Léovigild est un bâtisseur : il réalise une nouvelle image
de l’Etat : très centralisé, appuyé sur une
église forte. Léovigild s’efforce d’édifier un
Etat indépendant :
Il unifie les territoires ; Il tente d’unifier la population (abrogation
de la loi justinienne qui interdisait le mariage mixte entre barbare et
romains); Il tente aussi l’unification religieuse arienne. Politiquement,
Léovigild se détache de l'Empire byzantin en faisant frapper
monnaie et en se considérant « empereur en son royaume ». De
plus, il est le premier roi wisigoth à rejeter la traditionelle fourrure
des guerriers goths contre le manteau de pourpre, digne des empereurs romains
ou byzantins, à siéger sur un trône et à s'inspirer
du cérémonial byzantin. Enfin il institue la succession
monarchique héréditaire et la royauté théocratique
empruntée au modèle impérial romain.
L’affaiblissement du royaume est enrayé par la conquête
militaire de nombreux royaumes :
- Lutte contre les troupes romaines (byzantins) qui ont débarqué
dans le Sud de la péninsule. Ceux-ci s’établissent à
la nouvelle Carthagène et fonde la province Spania. Léovigild
leur reprendra Malaga (570) et Cordoue (572).
- Lutte contre
- Dans
- Lutte en région Cantabrique contre les Vascons au Nord de la
péninsule.
- Lutte contre les Francs au Nord du Royaume (Septimanie).
Mais l’arianisme farouche de Léovigild l’empêche de
s’imposer sur toute la péninsule.
RECAREDE,
ROI DES WISIGOTHS (586-601)
Récarède, fils et successeur de Léovigild, se convertit
alors au catholicisme catholique : c’est un succès politique.
Toute la population wisigothique et hispano-romaine est dès lors
régie par la même loi (à l’exception des juifs).
Sans renier l'œuvre politique de son prédécesseur,
Récarède poursuit l'unification du royaume wisigothique mais non
plus en faveur de l'hérésie arienne, mais bien sous
l'égide de l'Église catholique. L'administration du pouvoir
wisigoth conserve le latin : Les écoles épiscopales sont le lieu
de formation du clergé et des officiers royaux.
Sources : Grégoire de Tours : Récarède
se convertit au catholicisme
LA CHUTE DE L'EMPIRE
A la
fin de son règne, le Royaume Wisigothique s’est imposé sur
quasi toute la péninsule (sauf une étroite bande au Nord). Les
Byzantins ont été boutés hors de la péninsule et
une période de paix relative s’installe. Le royaume frappe sa
propre monnaie, leTriens. Les arts s’épanouissent
à nouveau dans le domaine des métaux (couronnes votives, croix
processionnelles…). Généralement parlant, la civilisation
wisigothique a ouvert le royaume aux influences byzantines. Des bijoux et des
tissus précieux byzantins sont importés.
Vase
(510) et pierre (lapida) contenant des inscriptions wisigothiques.
Au
niveau de l'architecture, peu de vestiges de l'art Wisigoth ont survécu
et ils révèlent effectivement plus d' influences Byzantines et
Nord Africaines que Romaines. L'arc en fer-à-cheval, les fenêtres
jumelles arquées séparées par une colonne, et les tunnels
en voûtes caractérisèrent les premières
églises catholiques. Peu d'églises subsistent de cette
période. Les principales sont : au Portugal, igreja São Frutuoso
à Braga ;
et en Espagne, iglesia San Pedro de
Igreja
São Frutuoso et iglesia Santa Comba de Bande
Iglesia
San Pedro de
RODERIC,
DERNIER ROI DES WISIGOTHS (709-711)
Rodéric est le roi qui connaîtra la fin de l’Empire
Wisigothique sous les coups de l’armée musulmane. Il meurt au
champ de bataille en 711 dans la province de Cadix (Sud de l’Espagne.)
Liste
des rois wisigoths :
Royaume
wisigoth de Toulouse :
*
410-415 : Athaulf
* 415-415 : Sigéric
* 415-418 : Wallia
* 418-451 : Théodoric Ier
* 451-453 : Thorismond
* 453-466 : Théodoric II
* 466-484 : Euric
* 484-507 : Alaric II
Royaume
wisigoth de Tolède :
*
507-511 : Geisalic (ou Gesalic)
* 511-531 : Amalaric
* 531-548 : Theudis
* 548-549 : Theudégisel (ou Theudigisel)
* 549-554 : Agila Ier
* 554-567 : Athanagild Ier
* 567-567 : Liuva Ier
* 567-586 : Léovigild
* 586-601 : Récarède Ier
* 601-603 : Liuga II
* 603-610 : Wittéric (ou Witteric)
* 610-612 : Gundomar
* 612-621 : Sisebuth
* 621 : Récarède II (ou Recarède II), fils du
précédent
* 621-631 : Swinthila
* 631-636 : Sisenand
* 636-639/640 : Chinthila (ou Chintila)
* 639/640-642 : Tulga
* 642-653 : Chindaswinth
* 653-672 : Receswinthe (aussi écrit Recceswinth)
* 672-681 : Wamba
* 681-687 : Flavius Ervigius (Ervige)
* 687-700/701 : Égica (ou Ergica)
* 700/701-709 : Wittiza
* 709-711 : Rodéric
Derniers
prétendants au trône après la conquête musulmane :
* 711-712
: Agila II ; appelé Akhila par les Arabo-berbères musulmans;
peut-être le fils de Wittiza.
* 712-741 : Théodemir ; prétendant à la couronne
wisigothique après l'invasion musulmane (appelé par les
musulmans, Tudmir Ben-Godo : "Théodemir fils de Goth").
* 719-726 : Ardo ; il règne en Septimanie et frappe monnaie.
* 741-743 : Athanagild II, dernier prétendant au trône
wisigothique ; sa mort marque la fin de tout espoir d'un retour à la
monarchie hispano-wisigothique.
SOURCES : Jordanès, Histoire des Goths, 551
Grégoire de Tours, Histoire ecclésiastique
des Francs, 591
Voir
aussi : Vestiges du Portugal wisigothique
Grzegorz
Jagodziński
Jeszcze o Wenetach
Artykuł stanowi uzupełnienie tekstu mojego autorstwa pod
tytułem Zagadkowy
lud – Wenetowie.
Wenetowie – Słowianie?
Wiele czynników złożyło się na to, że
Wenetowie jawią się nam dziś jako romantyczni dumni, bohaterowie
i tajemniczy bohaterowie z przeszłości. Ich historyczna rola jest
wypaczana, chcemy bowiem dostrzec ich za wszelką cenę tam, gdzie ich
wcale nie było.
Jeszcze do niedawna mianem kultury wenedzkiej (czasami utożsamianej z kulturą Prasłowian) określano zbiorczo kultury oksywską, przeworską i wielbarską, z których w rzeczywistości tylko jedna wydaje się mieć związek z Wenetami. Dziś traktowanie Wenetów jako Prasłowian mieszkających niegdyś na terenie dzisiejszej Polski, która jakoby stanowiła kolebkę wszystkich ludów słowiańskich, odchodzi powoli do przeszłości. Uczciwie należy przyznać jednak, że są uczeni, którzy z uporem godnym lepszej sprawy bronią trudnej dziś do obrony tezy o Słowianach – odwiecznych mieszkańcach Polski. Ich tezy nie brzmią dziś jednak wiarygodnie. Stawiają oni na przykład pod znakiem zapytania lub po prostu przemilczają liczne już dziś znaleziska archeologiczne z terenu Polski pochodzące z okresu 500 p.n.e. – 500 n.e., które z całą pewnością nie są pochodzenia słowiańskiego i które jednomyślnie przypisuje się Gotom, Herulom czy innym plemionom germańskim. Problem pochodzenia Słowian i ich dziejów przed rokiem 500 n.e. ma jednak w istocie niewiele wspólnego z problemem Wenetów. Został on wyczerpująco omówiony w wieloczęściowym artykule mojego autorstwa, dostępnym tutaj.
Myliłby się jednak ktoś, kto by sądził, że dawne sentymenty zupełnie odeszły w niepamięć. Pewni słoweńscy pseudouczeni (Jožko Šavli, Matej Bor, Ivan Tomažič, zob. uwagę poniżej), kierując się pobudkami nacjonalistycznymi, a nie naukowymi, wystąpili ostatnio z hipotezą, że Wenetowie byli Słowianami, którzy odwiecznie zamieszkiwali Europę, wynaleźli i upowszechnili w swoim społeczeństwie pismo, koło itp., i byli twórcami europejskiego mocarstwa o setki lat wyprzedzającego imperium rzymskie. Autorzy ci twierdzą, że udało im się odszyfrować wenetyjskie inskrypcje w oparciu o współczesne słoweńskie dialekty. Już to jedno zdanie całkowicie zniechęca każdego logicznie myślącego potencjalnego czytelnika, a dzieło Słoweńców każe umieścić na jednej półce z dziełami Dänikena. Uderza stwierdzenie, że próbowano odczytywać odczytane przecież od dawne teksty. Autorzy prawdopodobnie nie wiedzieli o tym fakcie i ta ich ignorancja każe wyłączyć ich dzieło z kręgu literatury naukowej. Wyważali otwarte drzwi – i oczywiście urwali zawiasy.
Poza tym popełnili oni rażący błąd metodologiczny, porównując teksty pisane 2500 lat temu z tekstami współczesnymi, a pomijając np. teksty staro-cerkiewno-słowiańskie. Języki zmieniają się na przestrzeni wieków i to szybko. Wystarczy dla ilustracji wziąć sobie jakiś tekst staroangielski i spróbować go zrozumieć przy pomocy znajomości dzisiejszego angielskiego. Zaręczam, że to się nie uda, mimo że oba języki dzieli zaledwie 1200 lat. Otóż współczesny słoweński oddziela od wenetyjskiego dwukrotnie większa otchłań czasowa. Czy można być aż tak naiwnym, aby wierzyć w to, że jakiekolwiek słowo sprzed 2500 lat może być zrozumiane przy pomocy dzisiaj używanego języka?
Krytyka poglądów niezgodnych z
nauką bywa niebezpieczna
Zwolennicy pomysłu o tożsamości Wenetów z przodkami
Słoweńców starają się propagować ów
pogląd bardzo aktywnie. Ludzie ci pozbawieni są niejednokrotnie
koniecznego w takich przypadkach krytycyzmu. Bywa też, że cechuje ich
brak tolerancji dla poglądów popieranych przez naukę i
zgodnych z jej elementarnymi zasadami, a na wszelką krytykę odpowiadają
agresją. Niektórzy posunęli się wręcz do tego,
że odgrażają mi się wystąpieniem do sądu za
opublikowanie w internecie opinii, iż ich duchowi przewodnicy Jožko
Šavli, Matej Bor, Ivan Tomažič to pseudouczeni,
działający z pobudek nacjonalistycznych. Z uwagi na te czcze
groźby czuję się w obowiązku temat ten rozwinąć
publicznie.
Odkrywanie prawdy w nauce bywa bolesne, a nasz egocentryzm i jego bardziej wyrafinowana forma – antropocentryzm bywają przyczyną poważnych konfliktów. Do dziś w potocznym mniemaniu nasz ludzki gatunek wydaje się do tego stopnia wyjątkowym tworem przyrody, że cały świat uważa się za stworzony dla naszych zachcianek. Skoro nawet dziś, w wieku dwudziestym pierwszym, istnieją religie, które forsują taki pogląd, nie powinno nikogo dziwić, że w przeszłości posuwano się do mordów na ludziach krytykujących takie stanowisko. Klasycznym przykładem jest tu historia Giordana Bruno, który poniósł męczeńską śmierć w płomieniach za głoszenie prawdy, że człowiek wcale nie jest koroną stworzenia, a Ziemia, planeta, na której mieszka, wcale nie jest pępkiem wszechświata.
Bolesne bywało odzieranie ludzi ze złudzeń także w wielu innych przypadkach. Gdy Karol Darwin i Alfred Wallace przedstawili swój pogląd o zmienności świata organicznego, wywołał on stosunkowo niewielki odzew. Jednak po wydaniu przez Darwina książki O pochodzeniu człowieka (The Descent of Man) rozpętało się prawdziwe piekło, którego echa rozbrzmiewają zresztą do dzisiaj. Ludzie gotowi byli zaakceptować istnienie zmienności w przyrodzie, ale już nie pochodzenie własnego gatunku od jakichś włochatych, łażących po drzewach małpiszonów.
Dokładnie ten sam mechanizm leży u podstaw konfliktu wokół sprawy Wenetów. Niektórzy ludzie woleliby, aby ich naród miał świetlistą, wspaniałą przeszłość i aby nie wywodził się na przykład z nadprypeckich bagien. Ludzi tych nie interesuje dotarcie ani nawet przybliżenie się do prawdy. Będą oni posługiwać się swoistą logiką, wybiórczo traktując dostępne fakty i starając się z maniakalną zawziętością dowieść prawdziwości swoich idei. Co gorsza, będą wmawiali innym, że tylko oni tworzą prawdziwą naukę, natomiast ci wszyscy, którzy piszą podręczniki i encyklopedie zawierające treści niezgodne z ich poglądami, to banda nieuków i dyletantów.
Otóż ja nie boję się gróźb takich fanatyków i oświadczam z tego miejsca, że nie zamierzam się ugiąć pod ich presją. Powtarzam raz jeszcze, że Jožko Šavli, Matej Bor, Ivan Tomažič to pseudouczeni, których poglądy nie można nawet nazwać hipotezami. Radzę także z tego miejsca wszystkim, aby przed sięgnięciem do ich książek zechcieli zapoznać się najpierw ze stanowiskiem nauki i aby nie wierzyli w czcze zapewnienia autorów i recenzentów, że celem wspomnianych słoweńskich autorów jest odideologizowanie historii. W rzeczywistości jest bowiem dokładnie odwrotnie. Celem wymienionych autorów jest przydanie splendoru własnemu narodowi, co przebija z kart ich książki nawet przy pobieżnym jej przejrzeniu. Sami zresztą podkreślają, że chodzi im głównie o ideologię (w takim czy innym kształcie) – w takich przypadkach zawsze fakty spychane są na plan drugi, natomiast uwypuklana jest swoista ich interpretacja. Jeśli zaś fakty przeczą z góry założonym ideom – tym gorzej dla faktów…
Nauka jest specyficzną forma poznania, która stosuje swoistą metodę badania zjawisk wymagającą niespotykanej poza tym precyzji i dokładności. Nauka tworzy uproszczone, choć z czasem coraz dokładniejsze modele badanych zjawisk. Modele te pozwalają nie tylko zrozumieć, dlaczego dane zjawiska mają miejsce, ale pozwalają także przewidzieć ich wystąpienie. Nie jest też wcale prawdą, że nauka jest przyczyną nieszczęść, jakie spadają na naszą cywilizację. Jest dokładnie odwrotnie: nauka pozwala ratować ludzkie życie, stara się zrozumieć wszechświat po to, aby naszą egzystencję uczynić znośniejszą, daje podstawy dla rozwoju techniki. Właśnie dzięki nauce możemy komunikować się przy pomocy komputerów i internetu…
Wymienieni już kilka razy autorzy słoweńscy zostali przeze mnie określeni mianem pseudouczonych właśnie dlatego, że prezentowany przez nich pogląd nie jest spójny z elementarnymi zasadami metodologii naukowej. Uważam, że mam prawo do takiej oceny i że ocena ta nie może być dla nikogo obraźliwa (ani dla autorów, których idee są przedmiotem krytyki, ani tym bardziej dla czytających moje słowa), nie zawiera bowiem inwektyw ani słów wulgarnych. Jest jedynie prostym stwierdzeniem faktu, że mamy do czynienia z ludźmi, którzy świadomie lub nieświadomie oszukują innych, gdyż przedstawiają się jako naukowcy, a w rzeczywistości ich działalność nie ma z nauką nic wspólnego. Spróbuję poniżej uzasadnić ten pogląd na kilku przykładach, z których jeden zanalizuję bardzo szczegółowo.
Otóż od dawna powszechnie wiadomo, że każdy język zmienia się z czasem. Wiadomo też, że podobne do siebie języki mają wspólnego przodka, który uległ dywergencji, czyli podziałowi na języki potomne. Kilka przykładów takiego rozwoju języków i ich dywergencji możemy doskonale prześledzić analizując teksty pochodzące z różnych epok. I tak, najlepiej poznanym przypadkiem dywergencji jest rozwój języków romańskich. Wiemy mianowicie z całkowitą pewnością, że portugalski, hiszpański, kataloński, prowansalski, francuski, włoski, sardyński czy rumuński pochodzą od łaciny. Wiemy również, że te odrębne przecież od siebie języki nie istniały jeszcze ani w czasach Cezara, ani nawet kilkaset lat później. Możemy wręcz stwierdzić, że w pełni odrębny rozwój języków romańskich (z lokalnych dialektów, które z kolei wywodzą się z jednolitej niegdyś łaciny Rzymu) był możliwy dopiero po upadku Rzymu, a więc w przybliżeniu po roku 500 n.e.
Wiadomo też, że języki słowiańskie (spośród których jako odrębne klasyfikuje się zazwyczaj polski, kaszubski, dolnołużycki, górnołużycki, czeski, słowacki, ukraiński, białoruski, rosyjski, słoweński, serbsko-chorwacki, macedoński i bułgarski) są do siebie stosunkowo podobne. Można ocenić, a nawet obliczyć, że stopień ich wzajemnego podobieństwa jest większy niż w przypadku języków romańskich. Właśnie ten fakt jest podstawą dwóch naukowo uzasadnionych tez.
Pierwsza głosi, że wszystkie języki słowiańskie wywodzą się od wspólnego przodka, który określa się mianem języka prasłowiańskiego, prajęzyka słowiańskiego, czasem także po prostu języka słowiańskiego lub ogólnosłowiańskiego (ang. Common Slavic). Istnienie tego języka nie jest co prawda w pełni dowiedzione, jest jednak na tyle prawdopodobne, że nauka jest zmuszona potraktować jego istnienie jako pewne. Właśnie jedną z cech nauki jest to, że u jej podstaw tkwi nie tylko to, co namacalne, ale także to, co uznano za dostatecznie prawdopodobne. Pomimo tej niepewności naukowcy dokonali niesłychanych osiągnięć. Fakt ten silnie przemawia za poprawnością traktowania dostatecznie prawdopodobnych faktów za pewne. Nauka bazuje na takim założeniu od stuleci i jak się okazuje, jedynie pomaga jej to w rozwoju.
Druga równie prawdopodobna teza głosi, że dywergencja
języka słowiańskiego na poszczególne dialekty, a potem
języki słowiańskie, nie mogła nastąpić zbyt dawno
temu. Skoro są one bardziej podobne do siebie niż języki
romańskie, których powstanie możemy prześledzić
bezpośrednio, zrozumiałą chyba jest teza, że odrębne
języki słowiańskie są jeszcze młodsze od
romańskich i że musiały powstać pomiędzy
Nie jest prawdą, że skoro nie znaleziono dotąd pisemnych świadectw dwóch wyżej wymienionych tez, istnienie języka ogólnosłowiańskiego jest jedynie czystą spekulacją. Po pierwsze, nauka różni się tym od spekulacji, że bazuje na podobieństwie i powtarzalności zjawisk i dlatego jej przewidywania są pewne lub niemal pewne, w przeciwieństwie do spekulacji, które nie są oparte na metodach naukowych. Po drugie, twierdzenie, że już w 860 roku n.e. (czy nawet wcześniej) istniały poszczególne i wzajemnie mało zrozumiałe języki słowiańskie (w tym język słoweński) jest znacznie bardziej spekulatywna od tezy, że języków tych jeszcze nie było. Każdy myślący człowiek zdaje sobie chyba z tego sprawę. Skoro nie można udowodnić istnienia jednego języka wszystkich Słowian w roku 860 n.e., ale także nie można udowodnić istnienia już wtedy poszczególnych języków słowiańskich, trzeba przynajmniej zbadać prawdopodobieństwo obu tych tez. Nauka dostarcza nam bardzo wielu przesłanek na poparcie pierwszej z tych tez – część z nich wymieniłem powyżej. Nie ma też w zasadzie żadnego argumentu przemawiającego za istnieniem odrębnych języków słowiańskich około roku 860 n.e., a już na pewno w czasach datę tę poprzedzających. Wydaje się więc, że wybór jest oczywisty…
Tak jednak nie jest. To wręcz niewiarygodne, ale istnieją ludzie, którzy upierają się, że nawet w czasach znacznie odleglejszych istniały odrębne języki słowiańskie. Twierdzą oni bowiem mianowicie, że w okresie, gdy używano języka wenetyjskiego, tj. w drugiej połowie ostatniego tysiąclecia p.n.e., istniało już takie zróżnicowanie. Właśnie dlatego – zdaniem tych ludzi – napisy wenetyjskie można zrozumieć posługując się dzisiejszym językiem słoweńskim i dzisiejszymi słoweńskimi dialektami. To właśnie ci ludzie określają się mianem uczonych, a propagatorzy ich idei twierdzą, że określanie ich ideowych przywódców mianem pseudouczonych jest obraźliwe (choć nie raczą sprecyzować, kogo to właściwie obraża). Przecież to jest śmieszne, tak śmieszne, że aż tragiczne. Słoweńscy autorzy wbrew wszelkim znanym przykładom czynią bezzasadne przypuszczenie, że dialekty słoweńskie trwają niemal niezmienione od przynajmniej 2500 lat. A gdy ktoś inny, logicznie myślący, nazwie ich pseudouczonymi, następują groźby pod jego adresem ze strony zwolenników nonsensów i absurdów zawartych w twórczości omawianych słoweńskich autorów…
Przejdźmy jednak do pobieżnego tym razem omówienia kilku innych absurdów zawartych w książce Veneti. Jej autorzy twierdzą, że słoweński jest językiem zachodniosłowiańskim, podczas gdy żaden szanujący się lingwista nie podziela takiego poglądu. Owszem, choć mówi się o pewnych zbieżnościach słoweńskiego z grupą zachodniosłowiańską, język ten posiada wszystkie główne cechy grupy południowosłowiańskiej i tam właśnie należy go zaliczyć.
- Ogólnosłowiańskie
*tj (ze starszych *ti lub *kti) rozwinęło
się w c w zachodniosłowiańskim, ale w č
we wschodniosłowiańskim i w k', ć, č w
południowosłowiańskim. Słoweński ma č,
a nie c, i dlatego nie może być zaliczony do grupy
zachodniej, lecz do południowej (porównaj słoweń. noč,
premoči, sedeč i pol. noc, przemóc, siedząc,
podobne do odpowiednich form w czeskim, słowackim itd.).
- Ogólnosłowiańskie
*ś (powstałe wskutek 2. i 3. palatalizacji z *x)
dało *š w grupie zachodniej (w polskim zapisywane sz),
ale *s w grupie południowej i wschodniej. Porównaj
polskie wsze (archaiczne), wszystko, czeskie všechno
i słoweńskie ves, vsa.
- Końcówka
-ega (np. w dopełniaczu bogatega) jest dowodem
ścisłych związków słoweńskiego z
serbsko-chorwackim, który jest przecież językiem
południowosłowiańskim (inne języki
słowiańskie mają -ego, np. polskie bogatego).
- Zaimek jaz
przypomina inne formy południowe (jak bułgarskie az i SCS
azъ), a nie polskie, czeskie, słowackie czy rosyjskie ja.
- Ogólnosłowiański
przedrostek *orz- rozwinął się w roz- w
grupie zachodniej, natomiast w raz- w grupie południowej;
dlatego właśnie słoweński ma raz- (jak SCS,
bułgarski, macedoński czy serbsko-chorwacki), podczas gdy
polski, czeski i słowacki mają roz-.
- Grupy zachodnia i
wschodnia znają przedrostek *vy-. Zamiast niego w
językach południowosłowiańskich znajdziemy
wyłącznie *iz-: do której grupy zaliczymy zatem
słoweński (zob. np. słoweń. izhod = pol. wyjście)?
Najwięcej zbieżności Słoweńców ze
Słowakami i Czechami wynika po prostu z przyczyn geograficznych, a
także z podobnej kultury, która rozwijała się pod silnym
wpływem zachodniego chrześcijaństwa, podczas gdy
większość pozostałych południowych Słowian to
spadkobiercy kulturowego dziedzictwa Wschodu.
Kolejny absurd wspomniałem wyżej i przypomnę go jedynie dla porządku. Otóż napisy wenetyjskie zostały już dawno odczytane bez większego problemu (gdyż wenetyjski alfabet przypomina pismo etruskie, greckie i łacińskie), tymczasem Šavli, Bor i Tomažič chełpią się tym, że jakoby dopiero im udało się je odczytać… zupełnie jak gdyby pozostawały one wcześniej nieodczytane.
Autorów omawianej książki nie tylko nie można
nazwać uczonymi, a jedynie pseudouczonymi. Brakuje im także nawet
najbardziej elementarnej znajomości językoznawstwa historycznego.
Widać to przy analizie dosłownie każdego wenetyjskiego napisu,
której dokonują. Na przykład na pewnym naczyniu znaleziono
napis biegnący z lewa na prawo i odczytany jako LAHIVNAH VROTAH (wydanie
angielskie, str. 229). Znaleziono też inne naczynie z tym samym napisem,
lecz – co widać choćby z kształtu liter –
biegnącym w przeciwnym kierunku, co w wenetyjskich inskrypcjach nie
może dziwić. Według Bora napis jest palindromem i należy go
czytać
Pierwszy zidentyfikowany wyraz LA autor porównuje ni mniej ni więcej tylko z włoskim i francuskim wyrazem o znaczeniu ‘tam’, najwyraźniej nie wiedząc, że wyraz ten w czasach rzymskich miał brzmienie illā bądź (rozszerzone) illāc i dlatego nie może mieć nic wspólnego z wyrazem zidentyfikowanym przez Bora. Kolejne słowo – HIBNAH w naciąganej interpretacji Bora (z podmianą V przez B) – jest przyrównywane do aorystu staro-cerkiewno-słowiańskiego (SCS) gibnahъ. Ciekawe, że znak H raz odpowiada słowiańskiemu g, innym razem x. Najwidoczniej Bor nie wie także, że w wieku IX n.e., a co dopiero w wieku III p.n.e., doskonale rozróżniano y od i. Rozróżnienie to zagubiły co prawda języki południowosłowiańskie (w tym słoweński), ale dopiero w wiekach późniejszych. I dlatego w SCS nigdy w rzeczywistości nie spotkamy żadnego gibnahъ, jak tego chce Bor, który w tym wypadku albo jest kompletnym ignorantem, albo świadomie bądź nieświadomie wprowadza czytelnika w błąd, przytaczając formę staro-cerkiewno-słowiańską, która nigdy nie istniała. Każdy student polonistyki wie z ćwiczeń z języka SCS, że aoryst czasownika gybnǫti brzmiał gybъ, gybnǫxъ lub gyboxъ, ale nigdy *gybnaxъ, a już na pewno nie *gibnaxъ. Ktoś kto pretenduje do miana wyroczni w kwestii pochodzenia języka słoweńskiego powinien przecież doskonale zdawać sobie z tego sprawę… Równie „naukowa” jest dalsza analiza tekstu. I żeby nie zanudzać tu nikogo, po prostu ją pominę.
Dodatkowy przyczynek do „podniesienia” naukowej wartości „dzieła” pochodzi od tłumacza, którym jest Anton Škerbinc. W swoich uwagach zaznacza, że używane w książce znaki jerów ъ i ь są jedynie oznaczeniami odpowiednio palatalizacji i niepalatalizacji poprzedzającej spółgłoski. W rzeczywistości w staro-cerkiewno-słowiańskich tekstach są to znaki samogłosek – krótkiego (ultrakrótkiego) i i krótkiego y. Bor, Šavli i Tomažič wydają się o tym wiedzieć i czasem uwzględniają to w swoich rekonstrukcjach, czasem jednak pomijają jery – w zależności od tego, co im w danym momencie bardziej na rękę (np. na stronie 236 podano rzekomo SCS formę ošъl, w rzeczywistości możliwe było jedynie ošьlъ). Na ogół jednak pomijają jery zupełnie, choć w starych tekstach słowiańskich w rzeczywistości ich nie opuszczano. Skoro jery wymawiano wyraźnie jeszcze około 850 roku n.e., czy jest w jakimkolwiek stopniu prawdopodobne, aby uległy redukcji już w roku 300 p.n.e.? Nawet tylko ten jeden fakt usprawiedliwia stwierdzenie, że działanie autorów książki Veneti miało więcej wspólnego z science-fiction niż z nauką.
Nauka wymaga powtarzalności badanych zjawisk. Jeżeli wyrazy jakiegoś języka ulegają zmianom, odbywa się to według określonych reguł. W omawianej książce próbuje się niejednokrotnie przedstawić teksty wenetyjskie jako bliskie słoweńskiemu, choć przecież różnią się one, czasami bardzo znacznie. Nie formułuje się przy tym reguł tych zmian, które miałyby jakoby zajść na przestrzeni tysiącleci. Jeżeli zaś do zinterpretowania napisów wenetyjskich jako słoweńskich konieczne jest założenie o chaotycznych, nieujmowalnych w żadne reguły i nieprzewidywalnych zmianach języka, interpretacja taka nie może zostać uznana za naukową.
W przedmowie wydania angielskiego (autorstwa T. Y. Ismaela) czytamy, że w drugiej połowie ubiegłego (zapewne XIX) stulecia w historii zarysował się silnie nacjonalistyczny trend, a celem tej nauki stało się zapewnienie kulturowego prestiżu i wyższości pewnym narodom (z treści książki nietrudno zgadnąć, że chodzi o naród niemiecki). Książka Słoweńców ma jakoby trend ten wyeliminować i jej celem ma być odkrywanie prawdy. Jednak w ostatnim akapicie wstępu czytamy już coś zupełnie innego. Okazuje się mianowicie, że głównym przedmiotem książki nie jest wcale odkrywanie prawdy, ale wspieranie pokojowego współistnienia narodów Europy Środkowej. A więc widać wyraźnie, że autorom chodzi jednak głównie o promowanie określonej ideologii. Zamiast odideologizowania nauki – mamy zastąpienie jednej ideologii przez inną. Według autorów co prawda wszystkie narody Środkowej Europy dzielą w jakimś stopniu dziedzictwo kulturowe Wenetów, jednak z treści książki widać wyraźnie, że wśród tych równych narodów jeden naród – a mianowicie Słoweńcy – jest równiejszy. To oni bowiem są jakoby bezpośrednimi potomkami Wenetów, co oczywiście stawia inne narody w mniej uprzywilejowanej pozycji. Zresztą autorzy piszą mniej lub bardziej wyraźnie, że chodzi im o przyczynienie się do zachowania tożsamości ich narodu, zagrożonego w przeszłości ekspansjonizmem niemieckim. Trudno nie dostrzec w takiej tezie pobudek nacjonalistycznych. I doprawdy obrażanie się o to, że przypisuje się takowe pobudki słoweńskim autorom, jest kompletnie niezrozumiałe.
Ja, autor niniejszego artykułu, życzę z tego miejsca wszystkim Słoweńcom świetlanej przyszłości. Odcinam się jednak zdecydowanie – idąc (paradoksalnie) za radami Šavlego, Bora i Tomažiča – od wszelkich prób fałszowania historii w imię choćby najszczytniejszych ideałów. Wszystkim zaś polskim PT. Czytelnikom mojego artykułu pragnę uzmysłowić jeszcze jedno. Otóż teza o odwieczności Słowian w Środkowej Europie pochodzi od autorów polskich, którzy chcieli przy jej pomocy również rozwijać pewną narodową ideologię. Autorzy Ci (między innymi cytowany w omawianej książce Lehr-Spławiński) twierdzili, że to Polacy są najczystszymi potomkami pierwszych Słowian, a inne narody słowiańskie (w tym Słoweńcy) to odpryski dawnego słowiańskiego monolitu, którego tylko my jesteśmy w pełni dziedzicami. Słoweńcy jak widać ukradli ten pomysł, dostosowując go do lokalnych warunków. Teraz to Słowenia, a nie Polska, stała się najbardziej uprawnionym dziedzicem Prasłowian. Ktoś złośliwy mógłby więc zarzucić omawianym słoweńskim autorom nie tylko pseudonaukowość i nacjonalistyczne pobudki, ale i kradzież naszej polskiej idei…
Implikacje zamieszania wokół
Wenetów
Poglądy, często absurdalne, oparte na przeświadczeniu o
szczególnej roli własnego narodu w dziejach świata,
prowadzą w rezultacie wielu naukowców do skrajnego sceptycyzmu
wyrażającego się tezą, że żadnego
paneuropejskiego Imperium Venetorum nigdy w przeszłości nie
było, i że zbieżność nazw różnych grup
Wenetów jest dziełem przypadku. Wenetów przyrównuje
się wręcz do Wolków, których etnonim zaczął
oznaczać różne niespokrewnione z nimi ludy celtyckie
(Walijczyków) i romańskie (Włochów i
Wołochów). Konsekwencją takiego stanowiska jest w zasadzie
pesymizm, prowadzący do konkluzji, że prawdy i tak nie poznamy. Czy
jest tak w istocie?
Podstawą do utożsamiania Wenetów ze Słowianami jest zdanie Jordanesa, pisarza z VI wieku n.e.: „ex una stirpe exorti tria nunc nomina ediderunt, id est Venethi, Antes, Sclaveni” (z jednego pnia poczęci trzy teraz ludy wydali z siebie). Jednak przecież Jordanes wyraźnie pisze, że ówcześni najeźdźcy byli złożeni z 3 plemion: Słowian, Antów i Wenetów. Wynika stąd, że choć Wenetowie spłynęli ze Słowianami w jedną nację, to początkowo wcale Słowianami nie byli (zob. też tutaj).
Historia zna wiele przykładów przeniesienia nazwy z jednego ludu na zupełnie inny lub nazywania jednym terminem ludów bliżej niespokrewnionych (zob. tutaj). Czy wobec tego faktu ktokolwiek ma prawo przypuszczać, że skoro Ptolemeusz opisuje Wenetów w środkowej Europie około roku 150 n.e., a 500 lat później Jordanes utożsamia Wenetów ze Słowianami, to Wenetowie Ptolemeusza byli również Słowianami?
Imperium, ale w wersji umiarkowanej
Autor tego artykułu jest zdania, że nadmierny sceptycyzm i postawa
prowadząca do podważania dosłownie wszystkiego, co ustaliła
nauka (dla własnego rozgłosu zapewne, zob. np. tutaj o krytyce
pseudonaukowych wywodów lorda Renfrewa o pochodzeniu
Indoeuropejczyków), bywają równie szkodliwe, jak niezachwiana wiara w
autorytety. Innymi słowy, można podważać i
odrzucać słabo uzasadnione hipotezy tylko wtedy, gdy formułuje
się hipotezę lepiej uzasadnioną. Niezastosowanie się do
tego wymogu wiedzie do krytykanctwa niemającego z nauką nic
wspólnego. Albowiem gdy brak lepszych wyjaśnień, nawet bardzo
słaba przesłanka urasta do rangi rozstrzygającego dowodu naukowego.
Co innego, gdy umie się przedstawić lepszą hipotezę i gdy
umie się ją dostosować do wszystkich znanych faktów. Taki
umiarkowany i konstruktywny sceptycyzm jest prostą konsekwencją
brzytwy Ockhama, która z kolei jest podstawą, na której musi
być budowana wszelka nauka.
Choć niektórym teza ta może wydać się zbyt odważna, wiele danych przemawia za przyjęciem umiarkowanej wersji hipotezy imperium wenetyjskiego. Z elementarnej nauki historii wiadomo, że Rzymianie byli ludem, który podbił i skolonizował olbrzymie obszary Europy. Znana jest także każdemu obecność Greków i Fenicjan w wielu miejscach starożytnego świata oddalonych od ich ziem ojczystych (pomijając imperium Aleksandra Wielkiego nie chodzi jednak o zwarty obszar, lecz o oddalone od siebie kolonie). Nie dla każdego jest jednak oczywista teza, że podobnie rozległe obszary jak Rzymianie musieli zajmować w przeszłości Celtowie, których „imperium” w końcu ostatniego tysiąclecia p.n.e. rozciągało się od dzisiejszej Irlandii i Hiszpanii po Turcję.
Otóż nie ma właściwie żadnych przesłanek, aby nie móc mówić o podobnie rozległych obszarach zamieszkałych przez jeden lud także w bardziej odległej przeszłości. Wyobrażenie, że ludy poprzedzające okres rzymski to jacyś prymitywni i zacofani barbarzyńcy, pozbawieni jakiegokolwiek rozeznania we wszystkich sprawach innych niż hodowla świń i uprawa owsa, jest całkowicie błędne. Już nasi praindoeuropejscy przodkowie sprzed 5 tysięcy lat znali instytucję króla (łac. rex, sansk. raj), odróżniali też miasta (skr. pur, greckie polis) od zwykłych osad (gr. oikos, łac. vicus, polskie wieś), hodowali też konie i używali rydwanów w celach bynajmniej nie rolniczych. W świetle tych faktów i w świetle dowodów archeologicznych i lingwistycznych nie dziwi i wydaje się pewna, znacznie późniejsza przecież, dość rozległa ekspansja ludów Iliryjsko-mesapijskich na Bałkany w I połowie I tysiąclecia p.n.e. (1000 – 500 p.n.e.). Jeszcze wcześniej mogła mieć miejsce znacznie rozleglejsza ekspansja ludu, który stworzył kulturę łużycką i inne kultury popielnicowe. Ekspansja ta trwała ponad tysiąc lat (1700 – 450 p.n.e.), objęła Francję, tereny naddunajskie i wybrzeże Bałtyku, i wiele wskazuje na to, że nosicielami tej kultury były ludy określające się nazwą Wenetów. Kres zadał jej najazd Scytów i ekspansja Celtów i Germanów. Wenetowie nad Adriatykiem w latach 1100 (?) – 150 p.n.e., nad Atlantykiem około 50 roku p.n.e. i nad Bałtykiem u przełomu er – to, jak się wydaje, jedyne poświadczone w źródłach resztki potężnego niegdyś plemienia.
Literatura
Wykaz literatury drukowanej można znaleźć tutaj.
Linki
Grzegorz Jagodziński
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
