Eagles and Hawks
- Thread starter LSCatilina
- Start date
Since we lasted talked about it, well I have had some more time now and if you want, I can try and make some maps for you if need be. However, if the file for Spain got corrupted, here I leave you the basemap I use, the only flaw it has is that for some reason I forgot to add the Turia.
Here it is: link to Dropbox
My only doubt about the maps, what city OTL is Amaia supposed to be?
Here it is: link to Dropbox
My only doubt about the maps, what city OTL is Amaia supposed to be?
Thanks you very much. If you want give a try, I can send you the .svg file I'm using?
Or, we could "share the burden" : Some plan of cities as Narbona in the VIIIth (As strange it sounds, I've the fitting basemap for that and half a dozen of cities) could be interesting.
Amaya : Less a city, than a fortified town.
OTL it was deserted during the VIIIth century, and ponctually repopulated
I suspect that the "Castello" formed originally the fortified settlement, as a castrum.
ITTL, the town would eventually last while never grows too importantly. Think Oviedo-scale. Sanmillan (inexistent city IOTL, equivalent of Compostella but in southern Cantabrias) would be more attractive.
Sure, send it. I don't have experience with urban map although I could try, I'd be a nice way of practicing, especially because I've been wanting to make a map of Valladolid (my home town) in which the impressive Herrerian cathedral was actually finished.
So then the repopulations of the Duero valley will be conducted differently?
From looking at your maps, there's this Albucia, that is neither Zamora (too much to the east) nor Valladolid (not in the Pisuerga course).
Also, I'm quite shocked you decided to favour Gijón over Oviedo even in a ATL, you'd think all the people from Oviedo will come and haunt you in nightmares for putting their arch-enemy as more important.
Repopulation of Duero theory was really nucanced since the end of XXth century.
It seems that you didn't have a desertification of the region south of Cantabrian Mountains, and while you had displacement of populations it may have been less intentional than a spontaneous attempt at gaining protection against Arabo-Berber raids.
Eventually, it meant that while the region wasn't deserted, some points were more favoured than others. One argument in favour of demographical continuation is the distinction between northern and southern dialects.
Anyway, due to a quicker establishment of northern Christian states (there Galicia and Cantabrias), the marches between these and Al-Andalus would be reduced. Basically, Cantabrias would reach the OTL expension of Asturias in second half of IX century in the 750's.
As a bigger part of Visigothic nobility survived and fled in Cantabrias and Galicia, you'll have a more well held land south of the highlands, both preventing their "desertification" but as well forming a pre-feudal situation (not the OTL concept of proto-feudalism, of course).
Finally it would help to maintain late Antiquity cities that were ruined OTL in the wake of Arabo-Berber invasions and raids.
Albucia is TTL name of Toro.
Oviedo won't be founded ITTL, and probably remain the small settlement that existed before the royal foundation.
Girion, Lugo de Asturia, Canges would take its place regionally, and Leòn would probably become an earlier capital for Cantabrias.
I'm butterflying away the ghosts of Oviedo.
Witch0Winter
Banned
By God, this is beautiful. Lovely TL you've got here, Catalina. Master of maps and writing is quite impressive.
By God, this is beautiful. Lovely TL you've got here, Catalina. Master of maps and writing is quite impressive.
Thanks a lot!
I should make the next update shortly (At this point, I didn't much avanced regarding Anbisa expedition, but more focused on the war between Galicians and Cantabrians, and about the Council of Narbona).
729 - 734
"The presumptuous become dry grapes before they ripen"
2/3
"The presumptuous become dry grapes before they ripen"
2/3
Even as Anbasa firmly held Al-Andalus under his rule, despite resistance by the Maslamids and the independent policies of the Fihirds, in preparation for his campaign in Gaul, the Christian princes north of Cantabrian highlands and Pyrenees managed to strengthen their own positions.
While the early part of Alfonso's reign is badly known, essentially by later chronicles or accounts from uneasy neighbours, the fortification (or re-fortification, repairing damaged structures) effort on the newly conquered regions improved his power over the southern and eastern parts of his principality.
Some of its other parts, in an area that was traditionally hostile to Visigothic authority, and where the population had not yet entirely renounced their ancient customs and beliefs, was on the other hand a harder challenge.
A series of matrimonial alliances with nobles of the principality was made in order to ensure the authority of his dynasty.
Froila was married to the daughter of an unnamed lord of the Asturian coast, while a union took place between between Viramar and Urraca, possibly the daughter of a gotandolos of the Ebre river.
Despite this policy, and without the threat of invasion from the South to unite against, the disparate gathering of Visigothic, Hispano-Roman and native population and nobility began to break up.
On the opposite side to Alfonso's capital, far west of Amaia, Galicia mourned the death of its duke.
Ranfredo, according to later sources, died from a wound recieved during a hunt party, one of the customary demonstrations of rulership of the early medieval nobility.
Another view, appearing in the Chronicle of Saint Didace, proposes a different version of events where Ranfredo is killed during the war against Alfonso : but despite references by XVI-XVIIth century historians to the benefit of Galician revivalism, it is viewed with great suspicion by the academic consensus
He was succeeded by his nephew, or possibly grandson, Ramiro who went on to give his name to the first royal dynasty of Galicia.
Not much is known about his reign before the war between the Galicians and Cantabrians.
The direct causes of the war are unclear, as is the role of Ramiro in the rebellions that Alfonso had to fight. Was it a concerted campaign or an opportunistic raid? It was been hypothesised that he wanted to challenge Cantabrian domination over northern independent Christians, but from what we know of his campaign, targeting more the coast than the more politically important hinterland, leaves this assumption dubious.
As part of the Cantabrias entered into rebellion in 729, mostly led by the Hispano-Vascon lords that pursued an autonomous, if not independent, rule of this region during the Visigothic era, Alfonso led his own armies in order to take back the eastern part of his dominion.
The bulk of the rebellion was certainly eastwards, in the old Domuit vascones but a rebel presence in other parts of the Cantabrias highlight a more widespread crisis that had outgrown a simple local Vascon revolt
More than a simple refusal of Alfonso's domination over the Cantabrias, the Mahulfine Revolt, named after the count of Vitoria, may have been a tentative to set up a new balance of power against the Neo-Cantabrian nobility that was issued from the Visigothic reflux of the 710s.
Since the VIth century Vitoria had been at the edge of both Gothic and Franco-Aquitain influences, and in the context of the renewal of the Arabo-Berber raids against Aquitaine, this balance may have been considered too threatened to last in the "old" Cantabrians' favour.
Ramiro took on himself to attack the Cantabrian coast this same year, or in 730, and from Bretonia marched on the Asturian coast, maybe supported or at least helped by the ongoing revolt.
It seems that Alfonso managed to take down his opponent relatively quickly, leaving eastern Cantabria after some months to advance against the Galicians and the western rebels.
Tradition tells about a battle near Pravia, "La Batalla del Rei Alfonso" where Cantabrians would have gained the upper hand.
The contemporary accounts are not so precise.
The simultaneity of Galician and Umayyad attacks highlighted in this passage could be a clue about a possible alignment of Galicia towards the Arabo-Berbers.
Regardless of the war accounts and details, the outcome of the conflict is more clear : Alfonso would benefit from a quite pacified rule up to 740s and from the southern conquests, but perhaps at the cost of an agreement with the rebels and Galicians.
Indeed, the "old Cantabrian", Vasco-Hispanic nobility, was more importantly mentioned during the early period of the kingdom, and part of the former Astura province became part of the western kingdom expanding slightly there.
It is somewhat discussed however, the state of north Christian principalities being chaotic and badly sourced enough to point to the possibility of an earlier expansion of Galicia
Contrasting with these troubled times in the North-Western Iberic peninsula, the Gothic situation seemed to be a mirror of Hispania before the Arabo-Islamic invasion.
In the wake of the truce with the Arabo-Berbers, under Maslama's tutelage, Ansèm went through a process of reinforcement of his power in Gothia.
While it is uncertain whether the fortifications found along Corbièras, traditionally attributed to his efforts, were really began during this period (a good part most probably date from after the re-conquest of Cerdanha and Pyrenean Piemont in the 750, as well as those issued from Milò's reign), it is certain that he managed to hold his authority over the Gothic nobility.
This authority found a qualitative boost with the gathering of a council at Narbona, the former Visigothic royal city where Ansèm set up his court.
More than simply willing to point a continuity between his rule and the Visigothic kingship, where councils served as a political balance between royal legitimacy and limited representation of high clergy and nobility, Ansèm sought to establish his rule in a more limited realm.
Save for the former province of Gaul (at the exception of Cerdanha, Carcassès and Razès), and some parts of Pyrenean Piedmont, the geographical extent of his authority was not to be compared with the kingdom of Vitizza or Egica.
Furthermore, while his predecessors could use the resources of their kingdom to crush rebellions, Ansèm had only a regional hegemony, and forced to conciliate the Septimanian nobles.
His prestige obtained against Arabo-Berbers, his royal position, and his pertaining to the Septimanian nobility helped him personally, but would not help in the long run, especially for the establishment of a dynasty, a regular concern of the later Visigothic kings.
Calling for a council in Narbona was a way to appear not only as a crowned prince, but acknowledged formally by the church and nobility as a legitimate lasting ruler.
The first important feature is the exhaustive list of the bishops present.
Not only was it sufficiently important to be included in the account, in contrast to the other remaining accounts (though some who argue about this particular omission do not give too much importance to it), but it included bishops of places not under his rule.
Orgèlh, Barciona and Tarragona were under Arabo-Berber rule from Ishbilya, and normally subordinate to the Arabo-Andalusian wali as they passed treaty with the Umayyad representatives.
The presence of said bishops in the Council of Narbona is therefore interesting for its relevance to several matters : did the local Spanian population acknowledge Ansèm as at least a symbolical overlord? The idea is tempting, critically after Ansèm's campaign along the Ebre against Ribatin.
There is little to support it, however, and the presence of a deputy for the bishops of Tarragona could point actually to an attmept by the main clerical presence in the region to keep control or at least watch over a peripherical kingdom, still subordinated to the Arabo-Andalusian wali.
The detailed list in the council's accounts then is more of a propaganda feature, skating over the motivations of some of the bishops or deputies present.
Generally, a mixed answer is preferred. Not having cut ties with Ishbilyian wali, Ansèm may have tried to both impose his authority and to pose himself as a regional Christian Emir over peripherical N-E, explaining the Arabo-Berber lack of an answer (especially when they prepared for their next expedition in Gaul).
The support of the Gothic clergy being even more needed then, and possibly explaining the demonstrations of Trinitarian orthodoxy displayed there, as if to point out that the king did not renounce the bases of Catholic faith for a more Islamic-friendly unitarian Christianity as some might have accused him of doing.
It would explain as well the presence of a deputy for the bishop of Arles, a city nominally under Umayyad dominance since 724. Ansèm acting as a local "governor" would have played into this presence that would lead eventually to the takeover of the Rhodanian city by the Goths.
The use of Flavius is a direct reference to other Visigothic conciliar titulature, and to the "Romanity" of the kingdom. It is worth noting that, thanks to a desire for maintained legitimacy, a significant part of the bishops present maintained Roman names, maybe highlighting the need for the clergy's support when Ansèm actually fought half of the Septimanian nobility (that supported Ardo) to reach the throne.
Possibly accidentantly, Ansèm is the first king to use, as far as we know, the cognomen Flavius accolated to his name since Erviga, traditionally considered as the father of Petro of Cantabrias.
While it remains heavily debated nowadays, it could be an occurence of the verity of this tradition, and a possible means to reclaim the overlordship over all Spanian Christians, even in Cantabrias or Galicia; a claim largely unenforced if actually in existence.
Eventually, the affirmation of companions, rather than only palatine nobility, indicate a growth of power of Septimanian counts (or rather, their acknowledgement) that despite the efforts of the Ansemids, led to the constitution of a Gothic feudality interspersed by royal recovery and dynastic struggles.
The mention of Gaul, before Spain, could be another indicator of the acknowledgement of the changed situation, the former Visigothic province of Gaul (Septimania) becoming the core of the new kingdom.
Overall, while the Council was gathered in the old cathedral-basilica of Narbona (Saint Rusticus) that would continue to host them afterwards, the kingdom of Gothia began to be seen as actually distinct from the Visigothic Kingdom; the city being acknowledged as the new core of Christian and royal power for the Goths, as well establishing its legitimacy as well as spiritual existence : the metropolitan of Narbonne, as the head of the aforementioned list, already having a de facto leading situation that would allow its political influence onto the palatine organisation.
Sunired would even benefit from his accession as metropolitan, being the late majordomo of Ansèm during the reign of Milò I
All this, along with the refocusing of Gothia on Narbona and Catalonia as a whole, would eventually allow the creation of a stable rulership and entity in the former Visigothic North-East.
Summary said:
Did the Latinization of Germanic / non-Romance names ad -ius in Spanish records?
In English records it's just -us ('Walterus dictus Wat' is one I remember off the top of my head).
In English records it's just -us ('Walterus dictus Wat' is one I remember off the top of my head).
Wulfarius is an attested form for Wulfar; as Bernecharius for instance.
As for Walter, the attested forms isn't Walterus, but rather Waltharius, Gualterius, and variants of it.
(Admittedly, Walterus as a form can be found, but minorized and a variant of these rather than the main one)
I suspect Walterus systematical use being a modern latin form, bastardized with english feature ), as it's the current latin translitteration of english names.
Obviously, it shouldn't show up for medieval latin translitteration of gothic names.
Last edited:
No, mediæval Engish records regularly simply add '-us' to English names. Looking through Reaney and Wilson, A Dictionary of British Surnames quickly gives dozens of examples, say. As you say, this has no bearing on Continental forms in general, and certainly not on Gothic forms. I simply asked because I am reasonably familiar with the English usages, and wanted to check the similarity/differences.Wulfarius is an attested form for Wulfar; as Bernecharius for instance.
As for Walter, the attested forms isn't Walterus, but rather Waltharius, Gualterius, and variants of it.
(Admittedly, Walterus as a form can be found, but minorized and a variant of these rather than the main one)
I suspect Walterus systematical use being a modern latin form, bastardized with english feature ), as it's the current latin translitteration of english names.
Obviously, it shouldn't show up for medieval latin translitteration of gothic names.
Ummm... The examples I am most familiar with are from the Middle English period. I THINK they did similar latinization of Saxon names in the AngloSaxon period, but Im far less confident of that.
I don't think you have english vs. continental uses at this point.
Using Vita Karoli, you have forms as Adalgisus, Desiderius, Wolfarius, Ercangarius, while other names shared with Goths or Lombards (as Bera/Bero) aren't used with -ius.
We could argue that Eginhard wasn't an Anglo-Saxon (but Vita Karoli is an exemple of AS latin influence during Carolingian Renaissance) and that except the continuation of Bede's Historia, It doesn't seems as AS were very much on latinisation of Germanic names for the sake of it (you have the notable exception of Ulfridus, I'll talk about it later).
And we'll have to notice that Alcuin does use -ius for, by exemple, Richarius, while being a german name.
While both form -us and -ius can exist for a same name (as well other variants) some forms are more used. Hence Wulfarius/Wolfarius rather than Wulfarus.
That said, if it follows same rules than for Roman nomenclature, -i-us could came from the use of marking the presence of a prestigious gens (as in Julius from Iulus) or prestigious ancestor.
While there's no systematisation in the Early MA (it's almost entierly absent for Franks), it can admittedly be a clue of a lasting usage in more romanised regions, and a mark about nobility (or high nobility) of the concerned people, real or alleged.
But eventually, and the fact high nobility surnames could be at least partially inherited probably helped, some prestigious forms lasted before more "common" (socially speaking) in some regions where it was more present, when the common form lasted in some others.
Basically, germans lines adopting roman use concerning namings of a gens.
At least, it's one of the answers I can think of about, without a more deep search, but it could explain use by Bede of Ulfridus instead of Ulfridius while he was clearly of royal line (or Bede being particularly srcupulous about putting an honouring mark for germanic names, while he use them for roman names and as well for people names; unless it's a tentative into the mandatory humiliating description of a saint).
(Furthermore, it can't systematically explain the use of -ius.
By exemple, Clothar/Clotharius can be an exemple of this use after a "r" as in Wulfarius probably without second tought about this.)
But in this regard, I don't think it's an anglo-saxon or english feature, and rather a later systematisation of a de facto use. Even in later times, dominant forms in -ius can be found while -us as Walterus being equally found in classical medieval France when the name isn't too much romanized in Gauthiers, or in German (Waltherus); while forms as Gualterius were present enough (as Gaulthier de Rennes) to last in ecclesiastical and humanist latin.
So, in lack of a deeper search (that would be interesting but would take times and skills that I don't have), I think we can settle that while the reason for the use of a particular latinisation can be related to regional customs, these (and the reason of the lasting forms) are maybe to be searched into social reasons.