murphy (francis x.)_julian of toledo and the fall of the visigothic kingdom in spain (speculum 27:1,...
TRANSCRIPT
-
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/ -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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.
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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.
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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-
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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-
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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
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 -
7/23/2019 Murphy (Francis X.)_Julian of Toledo and the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain (Speculum 27:1, 1952, 1-27)
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