murphy (francis x.)_julian of toledo and the fall of the visigothic kingdom in spain (speculum 27:1,...

7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)

1/28

Medieval Academy of Americais collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Speculum.

http://www.jstor.org

Medieval cademy of merica

Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in SpainAuthor(s): Francis X. MurphySource: Speculum, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Jan., 1952), pp. 1-27Published by: Medieval Academy of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2855291

Accessed: 13-08-2014 15:59 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:59:39 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacadhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2855291http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2855291http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacadhttp://www.jstor.org/


2/28

SPE

A

JOURNAL

OF

MEDIAEVAL

STUDIES

VOL.

XXVII

JANUARY

1952

No.

1

JULIAN

OF

TOLEDO

AND

THE

FALL

OF

THE

VISIGOTHIC

KINGDOM

IN SPAIN

BY

FRANCIS

X.

MURPHY,

C.SS.R.

FORTY

ears

before

the fall

of the

Visigothic

kingdom

in

Spain,

two

men rose

to

prominence,

and

proved

themselves

perhaps

the

most astute

of

all

the

rulers and

churchmen

in

Visigothic Spain:

King

Wamba,

who

ruled from

679 to

680,

and

Julian,

archbishop

of

Toledo

from

680 to 690.1

Their

paths

crossed

early

in

Wamba's

reign,

with

Julian

pouring

forth fulsome

praise

upon

the

monarch,2

and recrossed

shortly

after Julian's

accession

to

the

archbishopric,

when we find

the

churchman

involved

in

and

apparently

condoning

the

king's

dethronement.

Their

intervening relationships

form

an

interesting

section

of

Visigothic

history;

but the unravelling proves an exasperating task, due as much to the bias that has

hitherto

accompanied

attempts

at

historical reconstruction

as

to

the

meager

and

faulty

evidence

we

possess

for the

period.

The

problem

involved

in

the

archbishop's

dealings

with the

king,

and

in the

latter's

dethronement,

is

an

important

detail

in

the

relations

between church

and

state

in

Visigothic Spain.

It

has been

assessed

as

one of the

main events

leading

to the

downfall of

the

Visigothic

kingdom

and

to

the

Arabic

invasions.

Heretofore

the

problem

seems

to

have suffered

from a lack

of

close,

detailed

scrutiny

of

the

evidence,

as well as from

an inclination

on

the

part

of each

historian

to fit it

in

with the pattern of his particular Tendenz.Thus, there appears to be need for a

re-presentation

of the

facts,

just

as we

possess

them,

with

a

critical

analysis

of

the situation.

I

THE

PROBLEM

In

672,

by popular

consent,

but

against

his own

wishes,

the

Gothic

noble

Wamba was

chosen

king

of

the

Visigothic

state

in

Spain.

A man of

military

abili-

ties,

a

builder

and

a

good

legislator,

he

proved

an

efficient

ruler. But

on 14

October

680

-

a

Sunday evening

-

he

suddenly

fell

unconscious

in his

palace

at

Toledo.

The

archbishop

of Toledo was called by a group of gravely agitated courtiers.

He

immediately put upon

the

king

the

penitential

discipline:

his

hair was shorn

and

he was

clothed

in

a

monastic

habit,

in

accordance

with

the then current

practice

of

having

everyone

take

on

the

discipline

of

penance

before

death.3

The

king

awoke from

the

coma to

find

himself clothed

in

penitential

garments,

1

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:59:39 UTC

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/28

Julian

of

Toledo and the

Fall

of

the

Visigothic Kingdam

and

in

consequence

forbidden to

resume

his

royal

office

or

to return to the

world.

Whereupon,

he

was induced

to

sign

several

papers attesting

to his

acceptance

of

the

discipline

of

penance,

naming

one of

the

attending

nobles,

Erwig,

as the

new

ruler, and instructing Julian, the archbishop of Toledo, to anoint the new king

without

delay.4

Wamba then

retired

to

a

nearby monastery

and

lived

out his

days

as

a

monk.

Three months

later,

in

January

681,

the

new

king

summoned

a

national

council

of

bishops

and

noblemen,

which met

in

the church

of Saints Peter and

Paul

in

Toledo and was

presided

over

by

the

archbishop.

This

council

confirmed

Erwig

as

king, loosing

the

people

from

their

oath to the former

king,

and

anathematizing

any

attempt

at

insurrection.5At

Erwig's

request,

the

council

went on with

legis-

lation

against

the

Jews6 and

in

favor

of

those

who had been

deprived

of

citizenship

as deserters under the laws of King Wamba.7 For the sake of clerical discipline,

it

increased the

powers

of

the

metropolitan

in

the

appointment

of

bishops

for

the

whole

of

Spain.8

The

assembled

prelates

likewise condemned

the action

of

the

former

king

in

constituting

military

dioceses

and

having bishops

consecrated

for

them.9 Two

years

later,

in

683,

a

second council

(Toledo

XIII)

was summoned

by

the new

king.

It

helped

strengthen

his

hold

upon

the

throne;

but

it was achieved

at the

price

of

granting

various civil

rights

to the

people

as

a

guarantee

against

future

royal

whims.10

This

is

the

story

in

barest

outline,

as

recorded

in the acts of Toledo XII.

The

affair is

given

a

sinister twist in two chronicles dating from the end of the ninth

century.

The

first

says

laconically

that Wamba was

deprived

of his throne

by

Erwig;11

he

second,

attributed

to

King

Alphonsus

III,

fills

in

the

details.12

Giv-

ing

us

Erwig's

background-

he

was the son of

a

daughter

of

King

Receswinth

(649-67g)

-

it mentions

a

potion

he

had

prepared

for

the

king compounded

from

an

herb

called

spartus. Upon taking

the

drink,

Wamba

fell unconscious.

The arch-

bishop

was

called,

and

put

the

discipline

of

penance upon

him,

rendering

him

incapable

of

returning

to the

world.

Hence,

when the

king regained

consciousness,

Erwig

had himself

nominated

for the

throne

by

the

now

disqualified King

Wamba.

The

Chronicle

does

not

tell us

whether

Erwig's ingenuity

had

been

equal

to

planning

the whole

affair as

it

actually happened.

It

does, however,

furnish

details

that seem

to

justify suspicions arising

from

an

analysis

of the

acts

of Toledo

councils

XII

and

XIII.

But

in

the

historical

world,

the

archbishop

of Toledo

has

been

made

the

central

figure

in

the

case.

He has

been

roundly

condemned

as

a

scheming

adventurer

and

traitor

by

several of the

earlier scholars:

Dahn,13

Helfferich,l4

Wengen,15

Goirres.16

ven Gams

suscribes

in

part

to

the

accusation.17

All

this is

done

upon

circumstantial

evidence.

Erwig,

of

course,

comes

in for

his share of

the

blame;

but the

archbishop

is

cast

as

the villain in the

piece.

Ear-

lier

historians

had

hardly

conceived

of

such

an

interpretation

of the

fact, though

they

had been

repelled by

Julian's

apparent arrogance

in

dealing

with Rome

in

a

matter

having

to

do with the third

council

of

Constantinople.'8

More

recently

attempts

have

been

made to

exculpate

the

archbishop;

thus,

Tailhan,19

Leclerq,20

Villada,21

Torres.22

The

reliability

of

the

story

concerning

the

poisoning

of

King

Wamba has

been

called

into

question.

Even

King Erwig

has

come

in

for

his

share of

rehabilitation.




4/28

Julian

of

Toledo and

the Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

II

THE

SOURCES

The question of sources is paramount. For the period from 672 (beginning

Wamba's

reign)

to the death

of Julian in

690,

we

possess,

besides

the

Life of

Julian

and

the

latter's

History of

King

Wamba,

several

chronicles

and

the

acts

of four

councils

held in

the

intervening eighteen years (Toledo

XI

to

XV).

The

acts

of

Toledo XII

(9

to

26

January 681)

are

the

most

important

for our

purpose.

They

have

been

edited

in

Mansi

(Vol.

xi),

and

repeated

in

Migne

(PL,

LXXXIV).

As for the

chronicles,

they

are

four

in

number,

though

we have

four recensions

of

the

last of

them. The oldest

chronicle

is

the

Laterculus

Regum Visigothorum,

edited

by

Th.

Mommsen

in

MGH,

Chronica

Minora,

II,

461-469.

It

can

be

dated

as

of 710

A.D., though

it

appears

that

certain sections were written as early as

672.23 t

is

a

brief

enumeration

of

the

Visigothic kings

in

Spain

and

of

their

dates,

intended

as

an identification

piece

added

to

the

Leges

Visigothorum,

as was the

Laterculus

Imperatorum

o

the

Corpus

Theodosianum.24

The

next

chronicle

is

a

curious

medley

of

Byzantine,

Arabic,

and

Spanish

material,

edited

in

the

MGH,

Auctores

Antiquissimi,

xI,

334-369,26

of

which the

Continuatio

Isidoriana

Hispana

of

754,

concentrates on

Spanish

matters both

before and

after the

conquest.26

The

first section

is

the more

trustworthy part,

depending

on

the

Chronica

Isidoriana

for the

period

from

the death of Reccared

(610)

to that

of Leo the

Isaurian in

741.27

The

second

section

deals with events

in

Spain

from 610 to

754.

It

appears

to

have been written

in this latter

year.28

For

the section in

which

we are

particu-

larly

interested the

author shows an

assuring familiarity

with

both local events

and

personages.

He

makes use

of

the canons of the

councils,

referring

to

them

as

such.29

He is

acquainted

with

the

great

churchmen of the

period:

he

cites

Hella-

dius

Toletanus

(c.

16),

Isidore

Hisp.

(c.

16),

Braulio

(c.

20),

Taius of

Saragossa

(cc.

28-33)

from whose

work

the account

of Wamba's

expedition

against

the

Basques

is taken

(c.

36),

Ildefonsus

(c. 48),

Julian,

and Felix of

Toledo

(cc.

50,

55,

60).

In an

epilogue, excerpts

are

given

from one of

Julian's

works,

the 'liber

quem

contra

Judeos...

scripsit.'30

The

author

seems

to have

visited

Toledo,

for

he

cites

several

of the

Epigrammata

Wambae,

nscriptions

placed by

that

king

on the

monuments

he

erected

in

Toledo.3'

This

chronicle

has

also

been edited

by

J.

Tailhan

as

the

Anonime de

Cordoue

(Paris, 1885),

but the

edition

is

deficient,

having

missed

the

best

of

the

manuscripts,

the

Alcobaca.32

As

to

the author

and

place

of

composition,

the historians

disagree.

Florez

edited

it

originally

as

the Chronicon

de

Isidoro

Pacense.33

Dozy,

enumerating

the

inconsistencies

in

Florez,

supposes

it

to have

been written

in

Cordova;

and

Tail-

han

accepts

Dozy's

contentions.34

But,

after

discussing

the

theories of a

number

of

other

more recent

editors,

Claudio

Sanchez-Albornoz

concludes

that the

author

was a

Mozarab,

writing

at the

beginning

of

the

second

half of the

eighth century

and,

on

the

whole,

quite

trustworthy.36

Concerning

the next

two

chronicles

there is even

greater uncertainty.

Both

appear

to

have

been

written

in 883

A.D.,

and

are of

particular

interest

to us in

that

they

make

the first

suggestion

of

something

sinister in

connection with the

3




5/28

4

Julian

of

Toledo and

the Fall

of

the

Visigothic Kingdom

deposition

of

King

Wamba.

The

Epitome

Ovietense

also

called

the Albeldense

or

Aemelianense)

comes down

to us in

a version made

about 976

by Vergilius,

a

monk

of the

monastery

of

Albelda,

near

Logrono,

and

now

preserved

in

the

Es-

corial (D.1.2).36There is another version made in 992, once in the monastery of

San

Millan

de

Cogollo,

and

now

also in the

Escorial

(D.1.1).

The

Epitome

has

been edited

by

Mommsen

in the

MGH,

Chronica

Minora,

II,

370-375,

and

has

recently

been re-edited

by

M. Gomez-Moreno

in connection

with his

discussion

of

the Chronicle

of Alphonsus

III. Moreno

maintains

a

completely separate

origin

for the Ovietense

nd the

Chronicle

of Alphonsus

III,

despite

numerous

parallelisms

in

the

arrangement

of

material,

even

of

sentence

structure,37

The

second of these

chronciles,

the

Chronicle

of

Alphonsus

III

(or

of

Sebastian

of

Salamanca,

as

Florez

edited

it38)

comes

down

to

us

in four

versions.

As

edited

by Z. Garcia Villada in 1918, the first of these is attributed to King Alphonsus

III

of Asturias.39

The

second version

Villada

believes

to be

the

work

of

a

later,

barbarizing

contemporary;

the

third and fourth

are

redactions of

the

eleventh

and

twelfth centuries.

They

give

unmistakable

evidence of

interpolation.40

L.

Barrau-Dihigo

contests

Villada's

theories.41

Besides

offering

some

valuable

textual

suggestions,

later

accepted

by

Villada,42

Barrau-Dihigo

maintains

that

the

chronicle can be

attributed

neither to

Sebastian of Salamanca

nor

to

Alphon-

sus

III.43

In

particular

he

feels

that

the

obvious

falsity

of

a

letter that

heads the

longer

recension,

supposedly

from

King

Alphonsus

to

Bishop

Sebastian,

takes

all

the worth out of Villada's assumptions.44

Turning

to

the shorter

recension,

the

Rodense,

Barrau-Dihigo

then

points

out

the

naturalness

and

simplicity

of its

exactness

of

detail. He

discovers in the

Rodense

an

abundance

of

variations

common

to

two

distinct

families of

manu-

scripts

which contain the

longer

redaction.

He

concludes

that the Rodense is

the

product

of a

careful

selection

from

the

two.46

Two

further

opinions

in

the

matter

have

been

offered

by

C.

Cabal and R.

Blasquez.

Cabal insists

that

the

chronicle was

not

written

by

either

Bishop

Sebastian

or

King

Alphonsus,

but

by

Sisnand,

bishop

of

Iris. For

Sisnand seems to

him the only man to fit the requirements indicated in the author of the chronicle:

he

was

born in

Liebana,

had

been

chaplain

to

King

Alphonsus

III,

and

later,

be-

came

bishop

of

Compostella

when

Portugal

was

being

repopulated.46

Blasquez,

on

the

other

hand,

holds

that

the

two

redactions

are of

separate

origin:

the

Rodense

by

Sebastian,

bishop

of

Arcabica

and

Orense,

and the

Pseudo-Alfonso by

Dulci-

dio,

bishop

of

Salamanca.47

M.

Gomez-Moreno48

and

C.

Snchez-Albornoz49

have

come to

the

conclusion

that

the

Rodense,

being

much

simpler

in

style

and more

trustworthy

in

narrative

detail,

is

the

first and

original

chronicle,

and

most

probably

the

work of

the

king

himself.

The

second

redaction

they attribute to Sebastian, bishop of Orense.

For

the

present,

then,

there

is

little

hope

of

reaching

a

satisfactory

conclusion

as to

the

authorship,

place

of

origin,

and

even

the

order of

dependence

of

the

two

recensions.

For

our

purposes,

however,

it will

be

sufficient to

take into

account

the

probable

sources

for

the

material

having

to

do with

Wamba,

Julian,

and

Erwig.

By

dint

of

constant

checking

with

other

sources

we

possess,

some

sort

of

answer

is

possible

to

the

original

problem

here

raised.




6/28

Julian

of

Toledo

and

the Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

III

JULIAN'S

CAREER

Julian, the future archbishop of Toledo, was born in that city of Christian

parents

of Jewish

stock,

sometime before

642,

and

was

baptized

almost

imme-

diately

in

the cathedral

church.60

For most of

this

information we

are indebted to

the Vita

Juliani,

written

by

Felix,

Julian's

second successor

in the

see of

Toledo

(693-700).61

That he

was

of

Jewish stock

-

ex traduce

ludeorum

-

should cause

no

particular difficulty,

even

though

the chronicle

supplying

that

information

was

not

written

until

at least

sixty years

after

his

death.62

There

was

a

large

Jewish

population

then

in

Spain;

and

there

was

a

very

definite

Jewish

problem,

involving

in

particular

conversions

from

Judaism.3

In

694,

a

plot

was

discovered,

involving both baptized and non-baptized Jews, who were accused of having

made

plans

to

deliver

Spain

to

the

Moors.64

Hence

Felix,

composing

the bio-

graphical

notice

before

700

-

and

consequently

before

the

end

of the

Visigothic

regime

-

would

have been loath to

mention the

fact

of Julian's

Judaic

ancestry;

whereas

a

chronicler

in 754

would

probably

have

felt

perfectly

free to

do so.66

The

date

of Julian's

birth,

as

of the

few

other

happenings

of

which we

are

aware

in

his

early

career,

is

a

matter

of

conjecture.

Felix

writes

that

'after

the

death

of his

predecessor,

Ildefonsus

of

holy

memory,

from

about

the

seventh

year

of

the

reign

of

Receswinth,

through

the

whole

of Wamba's

reign,

and

down

to the third year of the most glorious Egica, he [Julian] achieved

a

wide-spread

fame,

being

honored

with the

diaconate,

priesthood

and

episcopate.'56

The death

of

Ildefonsus

and

the seventeenth

year

of

King

Receswinth

coincide

in 667.

On

normal

canonical

procedure,

if

Julian

was at least

a deacon

at

that

time,

he

must

have been

twenty-five

years

of

age.

The fourth

council

of Toledo

had

prescribed

that

age

as

canonical

for the ordination

of

deacons.67

Hence Julian

must

have

been

born

in or

before

642.

Felix

also

mentions Julian's

early

association

with

the

young

deacon

Cudila.

The

two

shared

ascetical

aspirations

and

had

some

thought

of

entering

the

monas-

tic state. But they

failed

to

achieve

that ambition.

It seems

that

as

youngsters

they

were

brought up

in a

school attached

to the

bishop's

residence

and that

they

later

taught

there.

Both

Julian

himself

and

Felix tell

us

explicitly

that

Julian

was

a

pupil

of

Eugenius

II

(646-657),

his

third

predecessor

in the see of

Toledo.68

Provision

had been

made

for

just

such

a

school

in

the

first

canon

of

the second

council

of Toledo.69

From

the

way

Felix

describes

the

early

life of

the two

young

men,

they

must

have

been

part

of

the

episcopal

household.60

Cudila,

it

appears,

eventually

became

an

archdeacon.61

He died

8

September

679,

and

was

buried

in the

monastery

of

St

Felix

in

Cabensi.62

A

short

while

thereafter,

Julian

was raised to the

episcopate

on 30

January

680.63

He

was

hardly

well

settled

in

the

metropolitan

see

when the

deposition

of

King

Wamba

took

place

on 14 October

680.

Julian

presided

over

the twelfth council

of Toledo

(January

681).

In November

683

another

national council

assembled

at Toledo

and

again

Julian

presided.

It

was

immediately

after

the close of

this council

(Toledo

XIII)

that

a

notary

arrived from

Rome

bearing

letters

from

Pope

Leo

II

(682-683).

They

were

ad-




7/28

6

Julian

of

Toledo

and

the

Fall

of

the

Visigothic Kingdom

dressed

to all the

bishops (praesulibus)

of

Spain:

to Julian's

predecessor

Quiricus,

who had died

in

January

680;

to

King

Erwig;

and to the comes

Simplicius.

They

requested

the adhesion of the

Spanish

church

to the decision of the sixth

general

council (Constantinople III, 680-681) in which Monothelitism was condemned.6

Not

wishing

to

reassemble

the

bishops

because

of

travel

difficulties,

the

king

and

the

archbishop

decided

that

provinical

councils

should be held

instead,

com-

mencing

with

that

of

the

province

of

Carthage

at Toledo

in

684.65 ulian

presided,

presenting

the assembled

prelates

with

an

abstract

of Catholic

belief

in

the mat-

ter,

approving

the

findings

of the sixth

general

council as

in

accord with the

tradi-

tions of the

Church.66

This

so-called

Apologeticum

was circulated

in

Spain,

and

forwarded to Rome.67

There,

it was

received

unfavorably, Pope

Benedict

II

tak-

ing

exception

among

other

things

to

Julian's

phrase

'Voluntas

genuit

voluntatem

sicut sapientia sapientiam.'68Julian thereupon wrote a second response or Apolo-

geticum

to

the

Roman

pontiff justifying

his

terminology

and the statement in

question

as

referring

to

an

operation

of

the

divine

essence.69

He

closed

with

a

remark

bordering

on defiance.70

Unfortunately,

the full text

of

this

Apologeticum

has

not come down

to

us,

extracts

only

being preserved

in

the

acts

of the

fifteenth

council

of Toledo.71

Unfortunately,

too,

because of

ambiguous

reporting

in both the fourteenth

(686)

and

fifteenth

(688)

Toledan

councils,

both the

sequence

of

events

and the

sequel

are

most difficult to

decipher.72

Julian's

conduct

has

received the

most

various interpretations. Gams and Gorres speak of him as practically in rebellion

against

the

Holy

See.73 Tailhan

and

Men6ndez

y

Pelayo

exculpate

the

arch-

bishop

entirely, maintaining

that the

strictures

he

passes

in his

Apologeticum

were

not

directed at

the

pope

and his

curia at

all,

but

to

other unknown

Spanish

critics.74

Both

E.

Magnin

and

G.

Villada

take a

more

balanced

view of

the

matter.76

Villada

points

to

the

fact that

Spanish

bishops

were

hurt

at the

apparent

slur

upon

their

orthodoxy

and

theological

competence.

As

in

the case

of

St

Braulio

and

Pope

Honorius

I

after the

sixth

council of

Toledo

(638), they gave

way

to

a

rather strong manner of expression.76

It is more

than

likely

that the

abstract of

the

Apologeticum

inserted

in

the

proceedings

of Toledo XV

does

not

represent

the final

draft

of

the

document

sent

to Rome.

In

particular,

there seems

to be

an

omission

in

the account

of

the

third

and

fourth

points

to

which

the

pope

had

taken

exception.

Again,

it

is

probable

that,

as

Father Tailhan

suggests,

there was

a

certain

opposition

to

Julian

even

in

Spain.

But it

can

hardly

be

doubted

that the

main

animus of

the

document,

such as

it

was,

is

directed towards

Rome.77

We have

no

further

knowledge

of

Julian's

career

beyond

the fact that

he died

6 March 690. Thus Felix wrote in the Vita:

'Having

achieved the honor

and

dignity

of

the

priesthood,

he

held

sway

for

ten

years,

one

month,

and

seven

days.

Being

faced

with the

inevitable

approach

of

death,

he

passed

away

on

the 6th of

March,

in

the

third

year

of

Egica,

in the

Era of

Spain

726,

and

thus,

was

buried

in

the

sepulcher

of the

most

glbrious

St

Leocadia,

Virgin.'78




8/28

Julian

of

Toledo

and the Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

His

death

is

commemorated

in

the

modern

martyrologies

on

8 March.

The

error is due

to the

editors

of the

Missale

Mixtum and

the

Breviarium Gothico-

Mozarabicum

which

Cardinal

Ximenes

de

Cisneros

had

published

in 1500

and

1502 respectively.79The date is given properly, however, as 6 March in two of

the calendars

published by

Ferotin

as

of the

years

1059

and

1079,80

n

the

martyrol-

ogy

of

Usuard,81

and

in

the list

of

the

relics held

in

veneration

at the

monastery

of

San Millan

de

la

Cogolla

in

the

thirteenth

century.82

Following

in

the

patristic

tradition,

Julian

was a

prolific

writer.

Among

his

extant works are

a

number

of

theological

treatises,

including

Prognosticon uturi

seculi,

a treatise

on

death,

judgment

and

the

resurrection,

that is most

compe-

tently

handled;3

De

sextae

aetatis

comprobatione

n answer to the

Jewish

claims

that the Messiah

of

the Old

Testament

was not

yet

come;84

and Antikeimenon

or

Book of Contraries.86The last is a series of harmonizations of apparently contra-

dictory

passages

in

the

Scriptures,

and

is not

an

unworthy

forerunner of

Abe-

lard's

Sic

et

Non. To his two

Apologetica,

defending

himself and

the

Spanish

bishops

against

the

charge

of inexactness

in

their

theological

expressions

before

the

court

of

Rome,

are

to

be added

a Liber

carminum,

epistolarum

et

sermonum

as

well

as

at

least

two

liturgical

texts

(a

missal for

the whole

year,

and

a

collection

of

collects),

none of

which,

unfortunately,

has

been

preserved.86

Felix,

his

biographer,

also mentions

several other treatises

which

have

appar-

ently perished:

a Liber

Responsionum

arguing against

the

right

of Jews

to

keep

Christians as slaves, a Libellum de remediis blasphemiae:a Libellum de judiciis

divinis

ex

sacris

voluminibus;

a Libellum

responsium

contra

eos,

qui

confugientes

ad

ecclesiam

persequuntur.87

As

a

younger

man

he had

written the Historia

rebellionis

Pauli adversus Warn-

barnGothorum

egem

-

referred

to

usually

as the Historia

Wambae

regis

-

whose

literary

affinities,

particularly

in

the

imitation

of

Sallust,

Ovid,

and

Vergil,

Manitius discusses

at

length.88

He

likewise wrote

a

brief

Vita

Sancti

Ildefonsi,

continuing

the

De viris

illustribus.89

Finally,

he

composed

an Ars

Grammatica,

evidently

the

result of his

years

teaching

grammar,

rhetoric

and metrics

in

Toledo. It has been given considerable attention by Manitius, and has been made

the

object

of

a

special

study by

Charles

H.

Beeson.90

While based on the

Artes

of

Donatus,

and

utilizing

Maximus Victorinus

and

Isidore,

it

shows a decided

preference

for

Prudentius,

Dracontius,

and

Eugenius

of Toledo

in

citing

exam-

ples

-

a

rather

clear

indication

that the

work

is

Julian's,

though

it

is not

men-

tioned

by

Felix.91

IV

JULIAN

AND

KING

WAMBA

To Julian's Historia Wambaeregis we are indebted for an intimate insight into

a

precious

bit

of

Visigothic

political

theory

and

practice.

For

Julian

states

in

the

very beginning

of

his Historia that

on 1

September

679,

while

occupied

with the

obsequies

of

King

Receswinth,

a

Gothic

noble named

Wamba

was

suddenly

sought

out

from

among

the

royal

retinue

and

publicly

acclaimed

king.

Much

to

the

general

surprise,

Wamba

refused

that

great dignity.

It

was

only

when

threat-

7




9/28

8

Julian

of

Toledo

and the Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

ened

with

death

by

one of

his

fellow noblemen

that

Wamba,

'influenced more

by

their

threats

than

by

their

entreaties,'

finally

accepted

the office. But he

put

off his coronation

until

his

return

to Toledo.

The burial of Receswinth had taken place at Gerticos, in the territory of

Salamanca,

some

190

miles to the

northwest of the

royal city.

Wamba felt it

only fitting

that

he

receive

his

kingly

consecration

on

the site

of the rulers of

old.

He was

likewise a

bit

wary

concerning

the

manner of his

election,

desiring

to

obtain the

consent

of the

rest of the

people,

lest

he later

be

accused of

ambition

and

usurpation.92

As

for

the election

itself,

it

appears

to

have

been

in

keeping

with

the decisions

of

the

eighth

council

of

Toledo

(654),

which

had

specified

that

the new

king

was

to

be

elected

by

the

higher

nobles of

the

palace

and the

bishops,

in the

royal

city or in the place where his predecessorhad died.93Behind this legislation seems

to

have been

the

desire

to reaffirm the ancient

Gothic

custom of

electing

the

sovereign,

which had been set

aside to

permit

Receswinth's

accession

to

the

throne

in 659. The

bishops

and nobles

taking part

in

that

monarch's

funeral

in 672 were

intent

upon

reaffirming

their

rights.94

Hence,

the

hasty

selection

of Wamba-

though

the choice was

in accord with

popular

sentiment.

Wamba

entered Toledo

on

20

September

and

proceeded

to

the church

of

Saints Peter and

Paul,

where

he

pledged

his faith

to

the

people

and received

their

oath of

allegiance.95

He was

then anointed

by Bishop

Quiricus.

It was

in

the

midst of this ceremony that, as Julian reports, a column of vapor-like smoke

stood

over

the

king's

head,

whence

a

bee was

seen to

spring.

This was

naturally

interpreted

as a

presage

of

felicity

and success

for

the new

king.96

Several

months

later,

in

March

or

April

of

673, Hilderic,

count of

Nimes,

and

Gumildus,

bishop

of

Maguelonne,

together

with Abbot

Ranimirus,

who had

usurped

the

see of

Nimes,

stirred Narbonne

to

revolt

against

Wamba,

who was

in

Cantabria

preparing

an

expedition against

the

Basques.

Wamba

sent

a

duke

named

Paul

to

put

down

the

uprising,

but

Paul

turned

traitor,

joined

Wano-

sindus,

duke of

Tarragona,

and

proclaimed

himself

king

of Narbonne.97

Wamba had penetrated into the Basque country when news reached him of

Paul's

treachery.

In

seven

days,

he

conquered

that

territory, subjecting

it

to a

methodical

devastation.

Then he

marched

toward

Narbonne,

arriving

at Cala-

horra,

where he

held

a

court-martial for

all

soldiers

caught

in

moral offenses.

Those convicted were

circumcised.

Dividing

his

army

into three

corps,

Wamba

crossed

the

Pyrenees. Having

rapidly

subdued

Barcelona,

Girn, Cluse,

etc.,

he

won a

decisive

victory

over the

rebels

at

Nimes.98

Paul and his associates

were

subjected

to various

humiliations,

being

finally

exhibited

to

the

city

of

Toledo

in

a

sort

of

triumphal

march,

with

head and

beards

shorn,

barefoot

and clothed

in rags. They were declared infamous and deprived of their possessions. With that

description,

Julian's

Historia ends.99

Assured of

control,

Wamba

turned

his

attention

to the

city

of

Toledo,

recon-

structing

public

monuments and

rebuilding

the

city

walls,

which

he

decorated

with

monumental

gates,

each surmounted

by

a

tower

in

which

was

a

chapel

dedicated to the

martyr-patrons

of

the

city.

The

inscriptions

thereon

were in




10/28

Julian

of

Toledo and the

Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

verse,100

nd

it has

been

suggested

that Julian

composed

them. He

certainly

was

an intimate of the

king,

and

his

biographer,

Felix,

mentions

the fact that he

wrote

numerous

carmina.

Judging

from

the

scope

of his Ars

grammatica,

he

must

have been the most accomplished man of letters in Toledo at the time. Hence

it

seems natural that the

king

should

have

turned

to him. But this is mere

conjec-

ture.l10

It

was

about this

time, too,

that

Wamba

destroyed

a

Saracen

flotilla

of

two

hundred

and

seventy

vessels in the waters

of

Algeciras.102

At

his

instance

in

675,

two

provincial

councils

were

assembled,

one

in Toledo

in

November,

the other

in

Braga.

These

councils

had to

do with ecclesiastical

discipline,

neither

touching

upon

civil

law

nor

the

kingship.103

Two

laws

found

in

the

Leges

Visigothorum

seem to have had

a

much more

far-

reaching effect. Probably as a result of the several Basque and Navarese rebellions

Wamba had

become

painfully

aware of

the

weakness

of

his

military

forces.

Ac-

cordingly,

he

decreed that

in time

of

invasion

military

service

was

obligatory

on

all in

the

vicinity,

not

excluding

the

clergy

-

and

this under severe

penalty.'04

It seems

to have

been

a

bold

move,

bound

to

prove unpopular

with the

bishops.

But

the

second

law

was

directed

even more

pointedly

at the

church.

It

struck at

a

real

abuse,

forbidding bishops

to take

from the

churches

of

their

dioceses

offer-

ings

made

by

the

faithful,

or

to

presume

to retain such

offerings

for their own

personal

use

even on

plea

of

prescription

after

holding

them

for

thirty

years.105

We have no indication of the effect of these laws on the relations between the

king

and

the

bishops.

F.

Dahn

makes much of the

'obligatory military

service'

placed

upon

the

clergy,

finding

therein

a

conscious

effort

on

the

part

of

the

king

to do

away

with the

simple

liberties

of

the

Visigothic

kingdom.'06

But Torres

rejects

Dahn's

hypothesis.

He believes

the

law

a

mere

restatement

of

the

Ger-

manic custom

of

defense

against

external

enemies.

He

points

to the fact

that

Toledo XII

(681),

while

relaxing

the

excessive strictures

placed

upon

the viola-

tion

of

the

law,

did

not

repeal

the

law

itself.107

Likewise,

the

law

restraining

the

avarice of certain

bishops

need

not

have

caused

much stir.

Similar

regulations

were passed in many of the church councils of the period.

Wamba

was

certainly

on

good

terms with

the

bishops

towards

the

end

of

675.

For in

November

of that

year

the eleventh council

of Toledo

and the

third of

Braga

were held at his

instance.

Both

the

preface

and

the conclusion of the

re-

spective

conciliar acts

are

highly

laudatory

of

Wamba's efforts

at

reform.108

It is a

bit

strange,

however,

that

despite

the

regulation

of the fifteenth canon of

the

Toledan

council

in

prescribing

a

yearly meeting

of

the

bishops

in

synod,

no

further

councils seem

to

have

been held

until after

Wamba's

deposition.

What

does

afford

grounds

for

Dahn's

contention

regarding

a

split

between

king and hierarchy is the matter introduced in the fourth canon of Toledo XII,

held in 681 a

few

months

after

Erwig

succeeded

Wamba.109

Wamba

is

severely

criticized for

his

interference

in the

institution

of

ecclesiastical

dioceses and

in

the consecration

of

new

bishops

without

proper

ecclesiastical

authorization.

In

particular,

Stephen,

bishop

of

Merida,

complains

that he

had

been

compelled

to

consecrate

a

certain

Cunildus

bishop

in the

monastery

of

Aquis

in

Lusitania

-

9




11/28

10

Julian

of

Toledo

and

the

Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

a

proceedure

entirely opposed

to the ecclesiastical canons and traditions.

Wamba

is likewise

charged

with

having

'commanded,

in

accordance

with his

customary

obstinacy,

that

here in this Toledan

suburb,

in

the

pretorian

church

of Saints

Peter and Paul, he [Bishop Stephen] should ordain a bishop, and that he should

do likewise

in

other towns and

villages.

...

'

Citing

decisions

of

previous

councils

held

in

various

parts

of

Christendom,

which

strongly

condemn the institution

of

new

dioceses,

the

synod

decided that

the

episcopal

see be removed

from the

town

of

Aquis;

but

that

Cunildus,

since he had

been

forced

into the

bishopric by

the

king,

be

given

another see.

It

went on

to

anathematize

any

similar

future

usurpa-

tion.

The

council

is

really

a

bit

violent in

attacking

the

former

king.

'To

contravene

the

customs

of our

forebears,

and to confound

the decrees

of

the Fathers

-

what

else is this than to destroy the end of the society of Christ, and by the license of

usurpation,

to

weaken

the state of the whole

church?'

Thus the

opening

sentence

of

the

canon. It

speaks

of

the

violence of the

prince,

and

of the

'unjust

commands

of

King

Wamba'

as

well

as

the

fact that 'communiter

noveramus

predictum

principem

concilio levitatis

agentem. '

Thus,

by

November

681

there

are indi-

cations

of

a

definite break

between

the

bishops

and the

king.

But there

is no

sup-

porting

evidence

proving previous

animosity.

And the tone

may

be due

to

pres-

sure

from

the

new

king,

Erwig.

As for

Julian,

he

certainly

was in

the

king's

good

graces

as

late

as 30

January

680, when he was advanced to the see of Toledo, for the kings of Visigothic

Spain

had

much to do

with the

election of

bishops.

Of actual

data,

all that

is

known

concerning

Julian's

promotion

is

the little that Felix vouches

us:

'A short

while

after

his

[Cudila's]

death,

this same

outstanding

Julian

was

anointed

in the

primacy

of

the above

mentioned

city

[Toledo]

following

Quiricus

of

happy

memory.

He was

to

attain as

great

a

fame

as was

due

to

one

endowed

with

such

diverse

virtues;

and

thus

in

our

time,

he

controlled the Church

of God in

a

won-

derful

manner. 'l

In view

of

his

growing reputation

as a

theologian

and

man

of

letters,

then,

as

well as of his intimacy with the king owing to the Historia, Julian was a natural

choice

for the see

of

Toledo when

Quiricus

died.

The

fact that

he

did

actually

obtain

the

post

indicates that his

intimacy

with

the

king

had continued.

Perhaps

the affair

mentioned

in

the

fourth

canon of

Toledo

XII

caused

some trouble

between

the

two;

but at best this

is

a

conjecture.

We

simply

have

no

further

indi-

cation that

such was

the

case.

And whenever Wamba

is

mentioned

in

other

canons

of

this

and

succeeding

councils

there

is

no hint

of

ill will or resentment. 2

V

JULIAN

AND

KING

ERWIG

The

Visigothic

monarchy

was an

elective institution.

As

such,

it

lay

open

to

various

attempts

on

the

part

of

successive

sovereigns

to

do

away

with

the elective

element,

and

to

secure the

crown

for

their

offspring.

This

was likewise the

source

of

continual

party

warfare,

often

terminating

in what has

been

called

the

morbo

g6tico

-regicide.

Up

to

the

reign

of

Witteric

(d.

610),

ten

kings

had

been

assassi-




12/28

Julian

of

Toledo

and the Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

11

nated;

only eight

died

in

bed

or

battle.

Thereafter,

to

the end of

the

seventh

century,

three

kings

were

deposed,

though

by

non-violent means: Swinthila

(621-631), Tulga

(640-642)

and

Wamba

(672-680).

The Visigothic state itself was composed of three main elements, by now

fairly

well

(though

not

perfectly)

fused: the

Visigoths,

the

older

Roman

families,

and the

Byzantines.

These last

had come

to

Spain

in the

army

sent

by

Justinian

in

550

at

the

request

of

Athanagild,

and had

settled

there.

It was

only

under

Swinthila

(621-631)

that

they

had

been

finally conquered,

and either

expelled

or

brought

under

Visigothic

domination.

Meanwhile,

they

had retained contact

with the Eastern

Empire.

It even

appears

that

they

had

been

a

source of

conflict

among

the Goths. Such at

least is the

tenor of the

Chronicle

of

Alphonsus

III

in

providing

a

background

for its

narrative

on the

deposition

of

King

Wamba:

'In order that we may inform you the more fully concerning the reason for the

entrance of the Saracens

into

Spain,

we here set down

the

origin

of

King

Erwig.

For

in

the time of

King

Chindaswinth

(642-653)

a

certain

Ardabastus,

expelled

from

Greece

by

the

Emperor,

arrived

in

the course

of

his

journey

(peregrinaturus)

in

Spain.

Chindaswinth

received

him

honorably, giving

him

a

close

relative

in

marriage.

And

from

her,

Erwig

was

born. It

was

this

Erwig, brought

up

in

the

courtly

tradition and elevated to

the

rank of

a

count....

113

The author of this

particular

version of the

Chronicle

sees

some

causal connec-

tion between

Erwig's

oriental

background

and the Arabic

invasion,

though

there

is no way of knowing whether he is referring to an internal weakening of the

Visigothic

state,

or to

something

more

sinister. 4

Erwig

thus

apparently belonged

to the

house of

Chindaswinth

and

Reces-

winth. Of

his

father, Ardobast,

there

appears

to

be

no record

in

the

Byzantine

history

of the

time.

However,

it

was

natural

that

he

should

have

sought refuge

among

the remnants of

his

fellow

nationals

in

Spain

upon

being

expelled

from

his

native land.

Another

small shred of evidence

is furnished

by

the

almost

certainly

Byzantine style

of the

edict

presented

by

Chindaswinth's

son,

Receswinth,

to

the

eighth

council of

Toledo. 5

Erwig's

suggestions

to the

twelfth

council

of

Toledo,

concerning a revision of the Visgothic Code, seem to be modeled on Reces-

winth's.ll1

In

fact,

Helfferich

has

suggested

that

Toledo

XII in date

and detail

was

modeled on

Toledo VIII.117

It

has

been

contended

that

Wamba

represented

a more

Visigothic

faction.

And

although

we

are

not

at all

certain

that

the

Byzantine

influence

was

really

an

issue of

the

day,

there was a

definite

divergence

between

the

party

of

Wamba

and

that

of

Erwig.

Originally,

Chindaswinth

had obtained

the throne

by

violence

in

642.

In

order

to secure

the

kingship

for

his

son,

he

had

associated

Receswinth

in

that office

as

early

as

648.118

Although

the

eighth

council

of

Toledo,

held

after

the death of Chindaswinth (652), confirmed Receswinth's possession of the

throne,

it

reaffirmed

the

right

of

the nobles

and

bishops

to

elect

their

sovereign.19

As

has

been seen

above,

Wamba's fears

in

taking

over

the

kingship

were

justi-

fied

by

the

rebellion

of the

Basques,

as well

as

by

that

of

Duke

Paul

and

the

Septimanians.

Attempts

have been made

to

connect

the

latter

with

the

reaction

of

the

Byzantine

faction

to Wamba's

election.

But Julian

fails

to

mention

this in




13/28

12 Julian

of

Toledo and the

Fall

of

the

Visigothic Kingdom

his

Historia;

and

there

is no other

evidence

for

such

a

contention.

Julian

is like-

wise silent about

an

insurrection

supposed

to have broken

out even before

Paul's. Theories have been

built

up

in

this

regard upon

the

evidence

of

certain

coins suggesting the names Gunifredo, Jajito, and Judila. But M. Torres considers

Julian's

silence

as final in

the

matter.120

Our

only

record

of

a

connection

between

Julian

and

Erwig

before

the latter's

kingship

is

the

mention

by

Felix

of

a

letter

appended

to a

work of Julian's now

lost,

originally

directed

to

'lord

Erwig,

at

the time

of

his

countship

(comitatus).'121

They

are next mentioned

together

in connection with the

deposition

of

King

Wamba;

and

finally

in

the Toledan councils held

under

Erwig

with Julian

presid-

ing.

But

there

is no

indication

of

a

close

co-operation

of

the

two in

regard

to

ecclesiastical

or

political policies;

though,

since Julian

was

primate

of

the

royal

city, such may easily have been the case.

Erwig

convoked the twelfth

council

of Toledo in

January

681.

His

object

evidently

was

to obtain

conciliar saction

for

his

occupation

of

the

royal

throne.

He

was also anxious to

reorganize

certain

phrases

of

social

and

civil

legislation.

As

already

noted,

he

called

the

assembly's

attention to

a

proposed

revision

of

the

Visigothic

Code.

In

particular,

he centered

attention on

the Jewish

problem,

and

on

the

case of

those

Spaniards

penalized

with civil disabilities

by

the

rather harsh

laws

of

King

Wamba

against

insubordination

and

rebellion.

At

Erwig's

request,

the twelfth council

of Toledo

issued

an

official statement

regarding the deposition of Wamba and the coronation of the new king. In his

tomus to the

council,

Erwig

charged

the assembled

prelates

and

noblemen:

...

I invoke

the

testimony

of

your

paternity

as an

assistance o our

welfare;

hat

thus,

as

we

believeourselves o have received his

reignby

God's

avor for

the

salvation

of

this

land,

and

the

assistance

of

the

people,

we

may

be aided

by

the counsel

of

your

Sanctity.

Thus

it

is,

that

although

he

origins

of

our elevation

are

not unknown o

your

Excellencies

through

common

report (opinabili elatione),

s to

how,

assisted

by

a

clear

disposition

of

divine

judgment,

I

ascended

he

royal

throne

and

received

the

sacrosanct

anointing

of

the

realm,

still

you

may

now be the better

able

both to know

of

this

from

written

tes-

timony

and

to

publish

t abroad

hrough

decrees

by

your

promulgation.

And

as

this

gather-

ing of your Sanctity may have found these same beginningsof our rulershipdivinely

ordained,

o

it

may bring

the assistance

of

your

prayers

o

these

affairs,

and

may

render

them the

encouragement

f

your

salutary

counsel.

Thus,

this

reign,

as I hold it

already

favored

by your

good pleasure,

may

enjoy

the

stamp

of

your

blessing;

and this

majority

of

your

Orderhere

gathered,may

seem

in

some

mannera

renewalof our

imperium.l22

In

acknowledging

Erwig's

accession,

the

prelates

and

noblemen

speak

of

written

testimony

placed

before

them: 'For with

what

peace

and

order

the

most

serene

Prince

Erwig

ascended

the

highest

office

in

the

kingdom,

and

received

the

power

of

reigning

through

the sacroscant

unction,

written

testimony

[here]

produced teaches us. In this, both the penance received by the former king,

Wamba,

is

published,

and

the

transference

of

the

regal

honor

to

this

our new

prince

is

revealed.'

The

council

then

gives

a

summary

of

events:

'For this same

Wamba,

since

he

was

constrained

by

an

instance

of inevitable fate

(inevitabilis

necessitudinis

eventu), having

received the

necessary

religious

rite and the

vener-

able

sign

of

the

sacred

tonsure,

selected

this

outstanding prince,

Erwig, by

an




14/28

Julian

of

Toledo

and

the Fall

of

the

Visigothic Kingdom

order

of his own

decision,

to

reign

after

him

and

to be anointed

with

the

priestly

blessing.l23

In

stressing

the

authenticity

of

the documents

placed

before

it,

the members

of the council say expressly that they have both seen and carefully examined:

Writings

stablishing

his

new order: hat

is,

the letter attested in the hand of

the

princes

of

the

palace

in

whose

presence

he former

king

received

both the

religious

rite

and

the

venerable

sign

of the

holy

tonsure;

likewise

the

notice written

by

the

same

[Wamba]

where

he

expresses

he desire hat

Erwig

should

rule after

him;

and also another nstruc-

tion

of the

above-mentioned

man,

favoring

the

honorable

and

saintly

brotherof

ours,

Julian,

bishop

of

the see

of

Toledo,

which

singles

him

out

and

instructs

him,

that with

all

diligence,

he should

anointthe

above-mentioned

ord

Erwig

n

the realm.In these notices

-

the

council continues the

signature

of Wamba is both unmistakableand

certified

by

the evident confirmation f these same

writings.

In the light of this evidence the prelates and nobles gave their approbation

to the

whole

proceedings,

acknowledging

therein,

the

hand of

God.

The

council

then

released the

people

from the oath of

subjection

to

Wamba,

transferring

their

allegiance

and obedience

to

the

new

king,

Erwig.

The canon

closes,

declaring

anathema

and divine

judgment against anyone

attempting

an

insurrection

or

in

any

way

trying

to

harm

the new

king.

Turning

to the

Jewish

question,

the council embodied

in

its

ninth

canon

the

twenty-eight

laws

presented

to it

by Erwig.

In his

instruction to

the

council,

the

king

stipulates

clearly

that

he is

returning

to the

legislation

of his

predecessors,

and in particular to the laws of Sisebut in this matter; though, as a matter of

fact,

he

is a

bit

more lenient than most of

them,

for

he has

done

away

with the

death

penalty.l24

Julian

has

been

accused

of

being

the

chief

instigator

of this

anti-Jewish

out-

break.

Paul

a

Wengen

in

his

monograph,

Julianus

Erzbischof

von

Toledo,

points

to

various

passages

in

the

Historia

Wambae

regis,

to

the De

comprobatione

aetatis

sextae,

and the lost Liber

responsionis

as

certain

indications

of

Julian's

anti-

Semitic

bias.

He

concludes that

as

chief

prelate

in the

Spanish

church,

Julian must

have dictated

Erwig's

policy

in

the

matter.'26

In

this

he

follows Graetz

and

Helfferich; but admits that the evidence upon which he bases his conclusions is

purely

circumstantial.'26

It

must be admitted that

Julian

could

easily

have been the

instigator

of

this

legislation.

However,

too

much must not

be

read into his

writings

against

the

Jews.

In the

Historia,

for

example,

he

is

writing

of

a

particular

rebellion

in

which

certain

Jews

played

a

definite

part;

and

although

the

particular phrase

he uses

in

referring

to the Jewish

participants

is

far from

elegant,

he is no

more

violent

against

them than he

is

against

the others involved in

the

insurrection.127

In his

De

comprobatione,

his

preoccupation

is

with

history

and

dogma;

while

at times his expressionsare strongly worded, stressing the manifestissima caecitas

of

the

Jews,

he sticks

quite

faithfully

to his

argument.

His

manner of

approaching

the

subject

is in

the

patristic

tradition.'28

Likewise,

in

the

letter

to

Erwig

prefac-

ing

the

work,

he

mentions

explicitly

that he has

written it on

Erwig's

request.

Hence

the

king

seems rather to

have

inspired

it,

than to

have

been motivated

by

it.

Finally,

if

we

can

judge

from

its

title,

the Liber

responsionis

was

merely

de-

13




15/28

14 Julian

of

Toledo and the

Fall

of

the

Visigothic

Kingdom

fending

a

principle

which Julian

as

archbishop simply

could

not

ignore

-

the

obligation

he

had

of

protecting

the

faith

of his

subjects,

even

slaves,

against

contamination.129

Erwig's second charge to the council was made in an effort to soften the harsh

effects

of

Wamba's

laws on

military

service. The latter had disbarred

a

large

proportion

of

the

nobles

and freemen

from

the use

of

their civil

rights,

and in

particular

from

the

right

to

testify.'30

The council

decreed

that those

penalized

by

the law

should

now be

restored

to

their titles

of

nobility

and to their

right

to

give testimony.l31

Some of

the older

historians,

following

Dahn,

have read

into this law

a

definite

play

on

Erwig's

part

for the

favor

of

the

clergy.

Dahn declares

explicitly

that

it

was a

lightening

of the

burden

on

the

clerical

party.

He cites it

as a

principal

cause in the weakening and downfall of the Visigothic State.132But, as M. Torres

points

out,

an

original

bias

leads

Dahn

into

a

total

misunderstanding

of

the can-

on.

Its

primary

purpose

is

civil

in

character,

not

military,

in

as far

as

it

looks

to

the

rehabilitation of

almost

'half of the

people'

disqualified

from

giving

testi-

mony

and from

holding property

-

a

serious

situation,

fraught

with the

possi-

bility

of all

manner of

civil disturbance.'3

As

for

the

military

significance

of

the

law,

there

is

no

mention

of a

relaxation

of

its

enforcement

under

Erwig.

In

fact,

Erwig

strengthened

the

application

of

the

law,

rendering

it

more definite.

He

decreed

that

in

time

of

military

need all

slave owners should bring a tenth of their slaves equipped with weapons into the

army.

Certainly

no

special

favor

is

shown

to the

clergy.

Hence,

it

is hard

to see

how

this

necessary

bit of

civil

legislation

had

any

effect

on the

weakening

of

the

kingdom.

It

would

seem

rather to

have

restored

a certain civil

stability.34

The

canon

itself

reads:

In

mutual

conference,

t

occurred

o

us that

in certain

cities

when

at the death of

the

bishop

a

long

delay

intervenesbefore he

ordination

of

a

successor,

no small disturbance

of

the

divine

service s

caused,

and a

harmful oss

accrues

o ecclesiastical

ffairs.For

since

the

messengers

re

prevented

from

makingspeed

in

reaching

engthy

and

widely

diffused

sectors

of

land,

newsof

the

passing

of

a

bishop

cannotbe

made

known

o

the

royalhearing,andthus

the

free

election

of

the

successor f

a

dying

bishop

by

the

king

is

long

put

off- a

difficulty

often

arises or

us in

the

handling

of

such

affairs,

and

for

the

royal power,

while

a

harmful

necessity

postpones

our consultations

or the

selection

of

bishops.

Therefore

it

is

pleasing

o all

the

bishops

of

Spain

and Gaul

that,

saving

the

privilege

of

each

prov-

ince,

it

be

licit

henceforth or

the

bishop

of

Toledo to install

(praeficere)

homsoever

he

royal

authority

has

elected

-

and whom

the

judgment

of

the

selfsame

bishop

of

Toledo

has

proven

to be

worthy

as

bishops

over the dioceses

n

any province

at

all,

and

to

select successors

or

deceased

bishops;

n

such

a

way,

however,

that each

one

who has

been ordained

must

present

himself

within

three

months

after

his ordination

before

his

own

proper

metropolitan,

n order

that,

informed

as to their

authority

and

discipline,

they may worthilymaintain he government

f

the accepted

see.185

Now,

while the canon is

ambiguous,

speaking

of

both

the

king

and

the

archbishop

as

selecting

or

electing

the

bishops,

its

general

sense

is

clear

enough.

Its

purpose

is

to do

away

with

the

long

delay

caused

murphy (francis x.)_julian of toledo and the fall of the visigothic kingdom in spain (speculum 27:1,...

Documents