Hegemony Beyond Rhine and Danube, Ad 14–98

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

barbarian friends and foes beyond rhine and danube 213 BarBarian Friends and Foes: Hegemony Beyond Rhine and danuBe, ad 14–98 Susan Mattern 1. Overview in the epitaph published on the bronze doors of his mausoleum and on his temples throughout the empire, augustus still claimed dominion over ger- many as far as the elbe river: i pacified the gallic and spanish provinces, and germany; all that the ocean surrounds from Cadiz to the mouth of the elbe (RG 26). in the year of his death, ad 14, his grand-nephew by adoption germanicus waged war across the rhine with eight of the empire’s 25 legions. in three campaigns between 14 and 16 he sacked barbarian villages and slaughtered their inhabitants, recaptured two of the legionary eagle-standards lost with Quintilius Varus, discovered the scene of the defeat at Teutoburg, and bur- ied the bones of Varus’ men. He also suffered a catastrophic reverse on land and wrecked a fleet, and Tiberius recalled him in ad 16. germanicus cele- brated a triumph and his victory was also commemorated on monumental arches in rome and on the rhine after his death in 19. By ad 98, Tacitus writes of the germans as a free people or group of peoples that has successfully resisted roman domination for hundreds of years (Germ. 37). in retrospect, he and other sources attributed to augustus a decision to abandon roman ambitions beyond the rhine, and some modern scholars have similarly described a policy of entrenchment and consolidation in europe in the course of the 1st Century ad.1 However, the evidence is complicated. in Tacitus’ time, rome already claimed control over an area in what is now southwestern germany, in the crux between the upper rhine (south of the mainz river) and the upper danube, a region the historian calls the Agri decumates; this area was later occupied and 1 on augustus’ policy of confining the empire behind its boundaries at his death, with references, see mattern 1999, 90 n. 40 and 111 with n. 136; the passage in Tacitus is Ann. 1.11. modern scholars: for full discussion see Whittaker 2004, 6-8 and his chap. 2. 214 susan mattern heavily fortified.2 in 90, domitian established two provinces named ‘ger- many’; we do not know what domitian meant by giving them that name. most archaeologists see a relatively fluid and permeable frontier in most of europe, and it appears that by tradition roman provinces did not have officially delineated external boundaries (though the boundaries between provinces were known and marked).3 emperors after augustus continued to wage war across the rhine, in- cluding (in the period discussed here) gaius and domitian. These cam- paigns are poorly attested; of gaius’ campaign we know only that he amassed a huge force (dio 59.22.1) and proceeded some distance across the rhine before turning back and staging his notorious invasion of the British Channel (dio 59.21; suet. Gaius 43–46). Corbulo campaigned against the Chauci under Claudius (Tac. Ann. 11.18; dio 60.31). domitian waged a war on the Chatti (ad 83), for which he raised a new legion (this was rare in the imperial period), constructed 120 miles of roads into ger- many, and used a large force of five rhine legions plus detachments from nine others. although ancient sources agree that he achieved little, he proclaimed ‘germania Capta’.4 on the danube frontier, augustus had claimed conquest of the king- dom of the daci, even beyond the danube (RG 30), although post-augustan sources describe the danube as the boundary of the roman empire. Ti- berius had campaigned across the river in the territory of the marcoman- ni—apparently in an effort to conquer the remainder of what the romans called germany—but he withdrew when illyricum revolted in ad 6. domi- tian campaigned across the danube against the sarmatians, dacians, mar- comanni, and Quadi. This war is very poorly attested and it is unclear under what circumstances it began. ancient sources attribute to the dacians the disastrous defeat of the consular oppius sabinus and also of domitian’s legate Cornelius Fuscus—apparently entrusted with the campaign of re- taliation—and the destruction of a legion; the dacians cut off sabinus’ head. domitian transferred one legion from germany to Pannonia, aban- doning his campaign on the rhine; one from dalmatia; and one from Brit- ain, notoriously curtailing agricola’s conquest of scotland. He made what ancient sources describe as a disgraceful peace with the dacian king, 2 Tac. Germ. 29; Hind 1984; sommer 2002. 3 For extensive discussion see Whittaker 1994 and 2004. 4 on domitian’s war against the germans see strobel 1987..
Recommended publications
  • Domitian's Dacian War Domitian'in Daçya Savaşi

    Domitian's Dacian War Domitian'in Daçya Savaşi

    2020, Yıl 4, Sayı 13, 75 - 102 DOMITIAN’S DACIAN WAR DOMITIAN’IN DAÇYA SAVAŞI DOI: 10.33404/anasay.714329 Çalışma Türü: Araştırma Makalesi / Research Article1 Gökhan TEKİR* ABSTRACT Domitian, who was one of the most vilified Roman emperors, had suf- fered damnatio memoriae by the senate after his assassination in 96. Senator historians Tacitus and Cassius Dio ignored and criticized many of Domitian’s accomplishments, including the Dacian campaign. Despite initial setbacks in 86 and 87, Domitian managed to push the invading Dacians into the Dacian terri- tory and even approached to the Dacian capital in 88. However, the Saturninus revolt and instability in the Chatti and Pannonia in 89 prevented Domitian from concluding the campaign. The peace treaty stopped the Dacian incursions and made Dacia a dependent state. It is consistent with Domitian’s non-expansionist imperial policy. This peace treaty stabilized a hostile area and turned Dacia a client kingdom. After dealing with various threats, he strengthened the auxiliary forces in Dacia, stabilizing the Dacian frontier. Domitian’s these new endeavors opened the way of the area’s total subjugation by Trajan in 106. Keywords: Domitian, Roman Empire, Dacia, Decebalus, security 1- Makale Geliş Tarihi: 03. 04. 2020 Makale Kabül Tarihi: 15. 08. 2020 * Doktor, Email: [email protected] ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3985-7442 75 DomItIan’s DacIan War ÖZ Domitian 96 yılında düzenlenen suikast sonucunda hakkında senato tarafından ‘hatırası lanetlenen’ ve hakkında en çok karalama yapılan Roma imparatorlarından birisidir. Senatör tarihçilerden olan Tacitus ve Cassius Dio, Domitian’ın bir çok başarısını görmezden gelmiş ve eleştirmiştir.
  • Julius Caesar to Caligula)

    Julius Caesar to Caligula)

    Notable instances of intellectual repression in Rome (Julius Caesar to Caligula) NB: Legal bases: • Twelve Tables (450 BC) (TT 8.1, cited by Cicero in Rep. 4.12, p. 79 in your text, who wholeheartedly agrees with the law) prohibited defamatory writings: ‘If any person had sung or composed against another person a song (=poem) such as was causing slander or insult to another…’ Penalty (in 450 BC, evidently) was to be clubbed to death. • maiestas (treason): first introduced 103 BC, underwent a variety of changes, though the important one was the law passed by Julius Caesar (lex Iulia maiestatis, ca. 45 BC) which made banishment the chief penalty. This was the law invoked frequently in the first century of the Principate (notably by Tiberius, but by almost all of his successors as well). Julius Caesar ca. 45 BC: expert on oracles exiled by Julius Caesar Augustus 31 BC(?): Octavian (=Augustus) burns all documents relevant to triumviral period 28 BC: philosopher (Anaxilaos), expert in magic, banished ca. 27 BC: Augustus curtails publication of the acta senatus (‘senatorial record’) ca. 18 BC(?): Augustus forbids publication of anonymous attacks 12 BC: Augustus, now pontifex maximus, burns all oracular books and writings. First known instance of ‘book burning’ (usually done under charge of maiestas) AD 6 (?): Corvus, professor of rhetoric, charged with ‘harming the state’ for discussing birth control and celibacy in his classroom. Outcome of trial unknown. ca. AD 6-8: Titus Labienus, Augustan orator and an historian, has his writings confiscated and burned by senatorial decree (on grounds that his writings were treasonous).
  • In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

    In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

    Case: 17-17531, 04/02/2018, ID: 10821327, DktEntry: 13-1, Page 1 of 111 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT WINDING CREEK SOLAR LLC, Case No. 17-17531 Plaintiff-Appellant, On Appeal from the United States v. District Court for the Northern District of California CARLA PETERMAN; MARTHA No. 3:13-cv-04934-JD GUZMAN ACEVES; LIANE Hon. James Donato RANDOLPH; CLIFFORD RECHTSCHAFFEN; MICHAEL PICKER, in their official capacities as Commissioners of the California Public Utilities Commission, Defendants-Appellees. Case No. 17-17532 WINDING CREEK SOLAR LLC, On Appeal from the United States Plaintiff-Appellee, District Court for the Northern District v. of California No. 3:13-cv-04934-JD CARLA PETERMAN; MARTHA Hon. James Donato GUZMAN ACEVES; LIANE RANDOLPH; CLIFFORD RECHTSCHAFFEN; MICHAEL PICKER, in their official capacities as Commissioners of the California Public Utilities Commission, Defendants-Appellants. APPELLANT’S FIRST BRIEF ON CROSS-APPEAL Thomas Melone ALLCO RENEWABLE ENERGY LTD. 1740 Broadway, 15th Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 681-1120 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Appellant WINDING CREEK SOLAR LLC Case: 17-17531, 04/02/2018, ID: 10821327, DktEntry: 13-1, Page 2 of 111 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Winding Creek Solar LLC is 100% owned by Allco Finance Limited, which is a privately held company in the business of developing solar energy projects. Allco Finance Limited has no parent companies, and no publicly held company owns 10 percent or more of its stock. /s/ Thomas Melone i Case: 17-17531, 04/02/2018, ID: 10821327, DktEntry: 13-1, Page 3 of 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ...................................................
  • Assembly District 1 Advocacy # of Children 0-17: 20,082 Health

    Assembly District 1 Advocacy # of Children 0-17: 20,082 Health

    Children's Fact Sheet Children's Assembly District 1 Advocacy # of Children 0-17: 20,082 Health 1 Children in Nevada Check-up: 659 2 Children Up-to-Date (Immunizations): 57.8% 3 Low-Birthweight Babies: 84.4 per 1,000 Mothers with Less Than Adequate 4 Prenatal Care: 148.4 per 1,000 5 Infant Mortality Rate: 4.4 per 1,000 6 Teen Birth Rate: 16.4 per 1,000 Safety0 7 CPS Abuse/Neglect Reports 281 Substantiated 14.2% 8 Children in Foster Care, CY 2017 93 HS Students Who Brought a Weapon 9 on School Property* 4.6% HS Students Who Didn't Feel Safe at 10 School* 7.9% * Indicates County Level Data 1-8 NV Dept. of HHS. (2019). Office of Analytics-Assembly District Reports. Retrieved from http://dhhs.nv.gov/Programs/Office_of_Analytics/OFFICE_OF_ANALYTICS_-_ASSEMBLY_DISTRICT_RE 9-10 NV Dept. of HHS. (2018). 2017 Nevada High School Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) Report. Retrieved from https://www.unr.edu/Documents/public- health/2017_yrbs/2017%20Nevada%20High%20School%20YRBS.pdf Children's Fact Sheet Children's Advocacy Assembly District 1 A I AN E # of Children 0-17: 20,082 Education 1 2 or more Races 8.1% English Language Learners (ELL) PI Asian 2% 11% 2 5.1% White 29.3% Reading Proficiency (Elementary/Middle) 55% / 45% 3 Math Proficiency (Elementary/Middle) Black 18.2% 48% / 37% 4 Students Who Qualify for FRL 59% 5 Science Proficiency (Elementary/Middle) 24% / 33% 7 Student Hispanic Race/Ethnicity 37.4% 6 School Star Ratings: 1 4 3 3 0 * Economic** Well***-Being **** ***** 7 Children 0-17 Living in Poverty 11.1% 8 SNAP Enrollment 10,041 9 TANF Enrollment 659 10 Children with All Available Parents in the Workforce 71% Teens 16-19 Not in School/Not Working11 3.7% 1-6 Opportunity 180: Great Schools, All Kids.
  • Roman Soldier Germanic Warrior Lindsay Ppowellowell

    Roman Soldier Germanic Warrior Lindsay Ppowellowell

    1st Century AD Roman Soldier VERSUS Germanic Warrior Lindsay Powell © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com 1st Century ad Roman Soldier Germanic Warrior Lindsay PowellPowell © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com INTRODUCTION 4 THE OPPOSING SIDES 10 Recruitment and motivation t Morale and logistics t Training, doctrine and tactics Leadership and communications t Use of allies and auxiliaries TEUTOBURG PASS 28 Summer AD 9 IDISTAVISO 41 Summer AD 16 THE ANGRIVARIAN WALL 57 Summer AD 16 ANALYSIS 71 Leadership t Mission objectives and strategies t Planning and preparation Tactics, combat doctrine and weapons AFTERMATH 76 BIBLIOGRAPHY 78 INDEX 80 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com Introduction ‘Who would leave Asia, or Africa, or Italia for Germania, with its wild country, its inclement skies, its sullen manners and aspect, unless indeed it were his home?’ (Tacitus, Germania 2). This negative perception of Germania – the modern Netherlands and Germany – lay behind the reluctance of Rome’s great military commanders to tame its immense wilderness. Caius Iulius Caesar famously threw a wooden pontoon bridge across the River Rhine (Rhenus) in just ten days, not once but twice, in 55 and 53 bc. The next Roman general to do so was Marcus Agrippa, in 39/38 bc or 19/18 bc. However, none of these missions was for conquest, but in response to pleas for assistance from an ally of the Romans, the Germanic nation of the Ubii. It was not until the reign of Caesar Augustus that a serious attempt was made to annex the land beyond the wide river and transform it into a province fit for Romans to live in.
  • Drusus Libo and the Succession of Tiberius

    Drusus Libo and the Succession of Tiberius

    THE REPUBLIC IN DANGER This page intentionally left blank The Republic in Danger Drusus Libo and the Succession of Tiberius ANDREW PETTINGER 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries # Andrew Pettinger 2012 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2012 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Data available ISBN 978–0–19–960174–5 Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by MPG Books Group, Bodmin and King’s Lynn To Hayley, Sue, and Graham Preface In 2003, while reading modern works on treason trials in Rome, I came across the prosecution of M. Scribonius Drusus Libo, an aristocrat destroyed in AD 16 for seeking out the opinions of a necromancer.
  • In Imperial Rome

    In Imperial Rome

    Becoming a ‘Diva’ in Imperial Rome OVID AND THE PROBLEM OF THE ‘FIRST LADY’ » CAROLE E. NEWLANDS In episode seven of I Claudius, the celebrated BBC drama on imperial Rome, the empress Livia, widow of Rome’s first emperor Augustus, Iconfesses to her grandson Claudius a long- cherished wish: ‘I want to become a goddess’. This essay explores the background to Livia’s desire to become a diva, the Latin term for a mortal woman who was deified. In particular, it examines the crisis in female representation occasioned by the novel emergence of women of power and influence, particularly Livia, in Roman public life during the age of Augustus (31 BC–AD 14) and that of her son, the emperor Tiberius (AD 14–AD 37). Fresh terminology attempted to convey positive images of elite women’s newly important roles in public life; at the same time, however, this terminology reflected persistent tensions in Rome’s patriarchal society between two conflicting paradigms of Roman womanhood: the retiring, traditional matron and the active, prominent spouse. The ultimate honour was deification, one of the most distinctive and controversial features of Roman religion in the early empire. Deification of prominent Roman leaders has been treated in scholarship as largely a masculine phenomenon, but it was an important female phenomenon too. Livia’s path to becoming a diva was a contested one. CREATING NEW MODES OF FEMININE During her lifetime she wielded a wide range REPRESENTATION of traditionally masculine powers throughout the empire; however, in her deified image she In 56 BC, during the latter years of the Roman appeared as wife and mother.
  • Numbers 1 to 100

    Numbers 1 to 100

    Numbers 1 to 100 PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 02:36:24 UTC Contents Articles −1 (number) 1 0 (number) 3 1 (number) 12 2 (number) 17 3 (number) 23 4 (number) 32 5 (number) 42 6 (number) 50 7 (number) 58 8 (number) 73 9 (number) 77 10 (number) 82 11 (number) 88 12 (number) 94 13 (number) 102 14 (number) 107 15 (number) 111 16 (number) 114 17 (number) 118 18 (number) 124 19 (number) 127 20 (number) 132 21 (number) 136 22 (number) 140 23 (number) 144 24 (number) 148 25 (number) 152 26 (number) 155 27 (number) 158 28 (number) 162 29 (number) 165 30 (number) 168 31 (number) 172 32 (number) 175 33 (number) 179 34 (number) 182 35 (number) 185 36 (number) 188 37 (number) 191 38 (number) 193 39 (number) 196 40 (number) 199 41 (number) 204 42 (number) 207 43 (number) 214 44 (number) 217 45 (number) 220 46 (number) 222 47 (number) 225 48 (number) 229 49 (number) 232 50 (number) 235 51 (number) 238 52 (number) 241 53 (number) 243 54 (number) 246 55 (number) 248 56 (number) 251 57 (number) 255 58 (number) 258 59 (number) 260 60 (number) 263 61 (number) 267 62 (number) 270 63 (number) 272 64 (number) 274 66 (number) 277 67 (number) 280 68 (number) 282 69 (number) 284 70 (number) 286 71 (number) 289 72 (number) 292 73 (number) 296 74 (number) 298 75 (number) 301 77 (number) 302 78 (number) 305 79 (number) 307 80 (number) 309 81 (number) 311 82 (number) 313 83 (number) 315 84 (number) 318 85 (number) 320 86 (number) 323 87 (number) 326 88 (number)
  • Julia Vipsania Agrippina, Mother of Caligula and Daughter of M

    Julia Vipsania Agrippina, Mother of Caligula and Daughter of M

    BIOGRAPHIES AGRIPPINA THE ELDER (C. 15 BC - AD 33) Julia Vipsania Agrippina, mother of Caligula and daughter of M. Vipsanius Agrippa and Julia (daughter of Augustus). She married Germanicus around AD 5 and bore him nine children, six of whom survived infancy. She accompanied Germanicus to the Rhine frontier (14-16) and was with him in the East when he died (19). Widow of the popular Germanicus, and mother of four potential successors to Tiberius, she became a focus for senators who opposed the Praetorian Prefect Sejanus. Despised by Tiberius, she and her adherents came under attack in the late 20s, culminating in the arrest of Agrippina and her elder son Nero in 29. Convicted by the senate, Agrippina and Nero were exiled to the Pontian Islands, where they died in 33. Her younger son Drusus was arrested in 30 and died in prison in Rome in 33. Her youngest son, Caligula, survived her, as well as three daughters, Julia Agrippina, Julia Drusilla, and Julia. AGRIPPINA THE YOUNGER (AD 15 - 59) Julia Agrippina, eldest daughter of Germanicus and Agrippina the Elder and sister to Caligula. She married Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus and bore him one son, Nero (the future emperor). She was honored along with her sisters Drusilla and Livilla during Caligula’s principate, but was implicated in the Lepidus-Gaetulicus “conspiracy” in AD 39 and banished with her sister Livilla to the Pontine Islands. Claudius, her uncle, recalled her from exile in 41 and married her in 49. She quickly became powerful (with the aid of Pallas, Seneca, and Burrus), receiving the title Augusta in 50 and persuading Claudius to adopt her son Nero.
  • BUSINESS EXCELLENCE AWARDS HONOREES! They Happen

    BUSINESS EXCELLENCE AWARDS HONOREES! They Happen

    Meet Your 2016 BUSINESS EXCELLENCE AWARDS HONOREES! They Happen. Be Ready. The Metro Chamber's new workers' compensation plan through First Choice Casualty Insurance Company gives you peace of mind that your business is covered and you're receiving member-exclusive competitive rates. - Five percent discount on First Choice base rate for Metro Chamber members - Most industries eligible for coverage - Safety planning and loss control oriented services - Online bill payment - Online access to claims information For more information or to get a quote today, visit ChamberIB.com or call 702.586.3889. Hometown Pride KRISTIN MCMILLAN PRESIDENT & CEO any of us were not born in Las Vegas. industries, and compositions in their efforts to grow our But here we are, helping to grow the local economy, support the community, and make Las local economy, creating jobs and new Vegas a better place to live, work, and visit. You can M opportunities, and contributing to the read more about this year’s honorees in this issue, and vibrancy of our community. Our actions be sure to celebrate them with us on November 4, at and dedication signify that we embrace Las Vegas as the annual Business Excellence Awards Luncheon at the our hometown. MGM Grand Conference Center. As we round out 2016 and look ahead to 2017, there are A lot will be coming down the pipeline in the coming some tremendous points of pride for our community months, and your Metro Chamber will be there every taking shape: the UNLV School of Medicine will welcome step of the way to champion the needs of the business its first students.
  • Why Did the Romans Fail to Conquer Scotland? Davi Dbreezej *

    Why Did the Romans Fail to Conquer Scotland? Davi Dbreezej *

    Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1988)8 11 , 3-22 Why did the Romans fail to conquer Scotland? Davi dBreezeJ * 'We have in common only with the Germanic tribes across the Rhine the distinction of not only stopping but defeating the Roman armies' (MacGregor 1987). The [Roman] frontiers are a symbol of abdication and failure' (Mann 1974a, 508). INTRODUCTION late th e n summeI sevents hi f finad ro han l seaso Romaarme e n th th (A f ) yo Dn83 governof o r Britain, Gnaeus Julius Agricola, defeated a larger Caledonian force at the battle of Mons Graupius. Agricola's son-in-law, the historian Tacitus, writing at the end of that century, was able to say (Histories 1,2),perdomita Britannia, 'Britain was conquered'. However, he goes on to state, 'statim omissa1', 'it was immediately lost'. No permanent Roman forts of first century - or any other date - have been found beyon Mounthe dth , wher Highlande eth t Stonehavea a s reacse e hth n (illu, s3) though Roman camps are known (illus 1), while archaeological evidence suggests that by about 90 all installation Forth-Clyde nortd th an f ho n so e beelind eha n abandoned (Hartley 1972,13; Hanson& Yeoman 1988,14). Tacitus may have been indulging in hyperbole - not all Britain was lost, only the northern part - but nevertheless the Romans had failed to complete the conquest of the island, and eved ha n withdrawn from territory which the overrund yha 1. The campaigns of Agricola, which from his second season (78 accepting the latest suggestions for the dating of his governorship, cf Birley 1981, 77; Campbell 1986) to his seventh (83) brought Roman arms from previously conquered Brigantia to victory at Mons Graupius, were the first of at least three occasions when Roman armies marched nort exteno ht d their empire.
  • (1733) Among the Most Striking of the Many Parallels

    (1733) Among the Most Striking of the Many Parallels

    (1733) Among the most striking of the many parallels which exist between the works of St. John of the Cross and those of the Sufis is the undeniably close resemblance between Living Flame of Love by St. John of the Cross and Niche for Lights (Mishkat al-Anwar) by al-Ghazzali. So close is said resemblance that even Fr. Bruno de Jesus-Marie, generally inclined to minimize the possibility of Sufi influence in the works of St. John of the Cross, admits: "It is possible that (St.) John (of the Cross) may have had (a copy of) the Mishkat in his hands."(106) In this work we will deal with the parallels between these two great works. St. John of the Cross was basically a poet, while al- Ghazzali was basically a philosopher and theologian. Though some praise the Spiritual Canticle from the literary point of view, while others praise The Revival of Religious Sciences and Incoherence of the Philosophers from the point of view of philosophy and scholastic theology, there is no doubt that Living Flame of Love and Niche for Lights are among the most succinct, esoteric and initiatory works of these two great religious geniuses. It has been said that: "No one can understand Spanish (Christian) Mysticism who does not know Old Castile." Like nearly all Spanish Christian Mystics, St. John of the Cross (1724) was of Old Castile. Unlike Ste. Teresa of Avila and Fr. Luis de Leon, two other great Castilian mystics of the 16th century, St. John of the Cross was not of Jewish origin, neither was he a Morisco (at least not on his father’s side), but rather he was on his father’s side, of the old nobility of Castile, which means that his father was of Celtic and Visigothic stock, "Old Christian on all four sides", to use the expression current in the 16th century, though his mother was a Morisca.