VARIA HISPANO-GETICA. TRACING THE POSSIBLE GETIC ORIGIN OF THE ARROWS EMBLEM ON THE COAT OF ARMS OF THE CATHOLIC MONARCHS AND THE FALANGE IN SPAIN
Juan Ramón Carbó García1
When the coat of arms of the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, was created in the 15th century, it was necessary to include different elements on it. To begin with, there was the eagle with the halo of holiness, the symbol of St. John the Evangelist, holding the shield up with its claws. This represents Christian religious unity in the territories governed by Ferdinand and Isabella, as well as divine protection through the mediation of the Evangelist saint – Jesus' favourite – and, of course, the divine right of the monarchy. The great shield held up by the eagle is crowned, of course, as befits a royal coat of arms. The emblems of the different kingdoms governed by the monarchs are grouped under a single crown: there are the emblems of Castile and Leon (the tower and the silhouette of a lion), and those of Aragon and Sicily (four red stripes on a gold background, for Aragon, and the space divided into four triangles for Sicily, two with the same emblem as Aragon and the other two with the old emblem of Sicily, a black eagle crowned in gold, with a red beak and claws on a silver background. Likewise, after the conquest of the Nazari Kingdom of Granada in 1492, the pomegranate, its symbol, was added. And next to the shield borne by the eagle there appear the emblems of the yoke and arrows, the personal standards of the Catholic Monarchs2. The yoke and arrows appeared at that time as a new element in Hispanic heraldry, and had not appeared before on any of the coats of arms of the monarchs of Castile and Leon or Aragon. As personal standards of the monarchs, they were expected to symbolize their nobility and right to sovereignty, and undoubtedly Ferdinand and Isabella, who were to govern the powerful group of territories of their kingdoms, had every motive for resorting to greater symbols that would represent as clearly as possible their origins and virtues. But the need to resort to certain symbols did not mean that they could just invent or adopt them. Heraldry, in its highest form, for royalty, does not admit inventions, but rather is always linked to tradition. We can thus affirm with all certainty that the heraldists of the Catholic Monarchs did not invent anything, and that the two emblems, the yoke and the arrows, have their origins based on more or less historical traditions and there are also explanations as to why they were included next to the shield of the Monarchs and why they were used in general as their
1 Researcher in training within the framework of the Training of Research Personnel Grant, financed by the Spanish Ministry for Education and Science with DGCYT Project BHA2003-01936. 2 On heraldry in the time of the Catholic Monarchs, see: RIQUER 1986; PARDO DE GUEVARA 1987; DOMINGUEZ CASAS 1993; LIÑÁN Y EGUIZÁBAL 1994; MENÉNDEZ PIDAL 1999; GONZÁLEZ/ MARTÍNEZ 2002. EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS, XVI–XVII, 2006–2007, p. 255–272 256 Juan Ramón Carbó García 2 personal emblems. Our intention was to try to look into their origins and give what we believe is the most plausible hypothesis, which we will defend in the following pages of this study: that the arrows of Queen Isabella originally came from the Getae. This hypothesis is based on the logical supposition – which we shall explain below – that a symbol was chosen for the Queen that would have some relationship with the traditions prevailing in her kingdom, 15th century Castile, i.e., the Gothic tradition. And this Gothic tradition was based – owing to a complex problem of confusion and identification between peoples and their histories that we shall also have to explain – on nothing less that the history of the Getae and the Dacians. Expressed in this simple way, the hypothesis may seem like a fantasy. It is thus necessary to pose and explain the suppositions and problems mentioned. To begin with, we shall refer to the question of the confusion and identification of the Goths with the Getae, in order to understand how part of the history of the Getae and the Dacians came to be included in the legendary past of the Goths. Furthermore, in this same section we shall allude to the rise of Neo-Gothic ideals in Castile and the Gothic traditions that prevailed in the 15th century. Afterwards, we shall approach the topic of the choice of the yoke and arrows symbols by the Catholic Monarchs and their inclusion next to the royal shield. Finally, we shall take a look at the adoption of the yoke and arrows by the Spanish Falange during Spain's Second Republic in the years before the Spanish Civil War in the 20th century and analyse that group's peculiar view of the origin of these symbols, which have been present in heraldry and Spanish symbology for more than five centuries and which seem to have a much older origin.
1. Goths and Getae in the Historiography of Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages3
Since the end of the 4th century C.E., the Goths have been assimilated to the Getae by both poets and historians, something which was favoured by the phonetic similarity and geographical proximity of the two names: gothi and getae. They were two peoples who had nothing in common, apart from having occupied, at very different points in time, the territory bordering the left bank of the lower Danube. However, the term Getae was to be used as the poetic name for the Goths for many centuries, whereas for historians, it was considered the old name for the Goths4. This confusion is similar to that between the Getae and the Scythians in the poetic works of the High Empire, especially after Ovid. These two confusions were to give rise to another one later on, that affecting the Goths and the Scythians, as frequent among historians and poets of the Late Empire as the assimilation between Goths and Getae. The problem lies in whether it really was a matter of confusion at the origin and was only that in subsequent historical and poetic works, or whether the assimilation of Goths and Getae was somewhat intentional, if not at the beginning, then sometime later. The answers to this question and to that of what this intentionality would have been seem to be clearly related to the historiographic problematic of the historical origin of peoples, a study that is complex and difficult to synthesize5.
3 This section has already been dealt with by the author elsewhere: CARBÓ GARCÍA 2004, 179–206. On the problem of the confusion between the Getae and the Goths, see also SÖHRMAN 2004, 169–196; CANDAU /GONZÁLEZ/CRUZ 2004; HOBSBAWN 1995, 1–14; DENIZE 1986, 75–82; BUSUIOCEANU 1985; GEARY 1983, 15–26; PETOLESCU 1983, 147–149; VON SYBEL 1847, 288–296. 4 SVENNUNG 1967, 5–6. 5 GEARY 1983, 15–26. 3 Varia hispano-getica 257
Hedeager suggests that the myths concerning the origins of peoples and epic poetry seemed to have helped to create identities for the warrior elites during the Period of Migrations, taking into account that the texts and the material culture would be ideologically related to the creation and articulation of a new social and cosmological order6. Ideology, a source of social power and a nuclear element in every cultural system, controller of beliefs, values and ideas, is a prior condition for social and political legitimization. The formation of oral traditions and written production are some of the vehicles of the materialization of these ideas7. In the 5th century and the beginning of the 6th century A.D., material culture turned into a symbolic materialization of the new social and political identities. The hybrid Roman-Germanic culture transformed the Germanic oral tradition which included origin myths, tribal histories and royal genealogies, of great importance for the political legitimization of the Germanic peoples, and put it in written form, thus integrating it into the imperial classical Roman tradition8. It is these mythical stories which are of interest for our study of the assimilation of the history of the Getae into the history of the origin of the Goths, which in turn was of great importance in the historical process of integration and legitimization of the latter. The Scandinavian origin myth can be traced back to Ablabius, who write a history of the Goths that has been lost. Cassiodorus, probably following Ablabius, wrote a Historia Gothorum in which he created a royal genealogy that comprised seventeen generations between the first king and Atalaric, following the numerical scheme of the royal Roman genealogy from Aeneas to Romulus. Although it incorporates an element from classical literature, it was perhaps an adaptation from an orally transmitted Goth genealogy. Genealogies, like heroic legends, are thus presented as instruments of legitimization9. In any case, if one wished to maintain credibility, there must have been certain limits to the alteration of the oral traditions of a people or to the change of its legends and sacred stories. The effect of genealogies and origin myths in the search for legitimacy and political domination would have disappeared if the manipulation had been too obvious. Therefore, these stories would not have been invented on the spur of the moment but would have developed, been altered or constructed throughout several generations, so that the power derived from their being told again and again would be reinforced and they would turn into pure tradition10. By adapting an oral tradition and constructing an “historical” royal genealogy, Cassiodorus thus legitimated the Goths. Certain ancient histories were to be used for new purposes in the invention of traditions that would become a heritage for people with a wide variety of pasts and identities, serving as that central nucleus of historical “truth” in the creation of a new socio-cosmological order11. At this juncture, it is not difficult to realize that the ancient history of the Getae and the Dacians would be used in this way in the invention of the historical tradition of the Goths. Part of the mythology of their ethnic origins was developed based on a confusion between Getae and Goths, which were probably first made equivalent in Julian the Apostate12. Prudentius13
6 GEARY 1983, 17. 7 MANN 1986: Political, economic, military and ideological. 8 HEDEAGER 1993, 121–132. 9 HEATHER 1989, 103–128; HEATHER 1999, 351–356; HEDEAGER 1993, 121–132; HEDEAGER 2000, 15–57. 10 TONKIN, 1995, 83–84; VANSINA, 1965; VANSINA 1985. 11 HOBSBAWN 1995, 6. 12 IULIANUS APOSTATA, De caesaribus, 311 C, 320 D, 327 D. He does use the term Geta as an equivalent of Goth, but in another of his passages he mentions a victory of the Getae over the Goths and also mentions the Dacians. 13 PRUDENTIUS, Contr. Symm., 2, 696; 2, 730. For him, Geticus is the same as Gothicus. 258 Juan Ramón Carbó García 4 adopted this equivalence in the 4th century and the formula became more and more popular14, without the ethnic identity of the Getae and the Dacians being forgotten at any time15. This was also done by Epiphanius16 and Philostorgius17, but it was not until the 5th century that there was an established tradition of calling the Goths Getae, with authors such as Paulinus of Nola18, Orosius19, Claudianus20, Rutilius Claudius Namatianus21 and Prosper of Aquitaine22, among others. St. Jerome also resorted to this term when speaking of the Goths in an erudite or poetic way23 and Sidonius Apollinarus referred to the Goths as Getae in his poems and as Goths in his letters24. And this is the situation when we arrive at Cassiodorus and Iordanes. Until that moment, we can speak of an identification between Getae and Gothi that occurred because of their coinciding geographically, because of phonetic proximity, because of the myth of the noble and heroic Getae which was subsequently transferred to the Goths (also playing a role here is their identification with the Scythians) and simply because of the transmission of the error from one author to another throughout the centuries, which reinforced the identification of Goths and Getae with a poetic value. It is perhaps in Cassiodorus and Iordanes, who follow this consolidated tradition, that we observe a different character in this identification: when we find the term Getae in the preface to Iordanes' History of the Goths25 – and we think the same happens in the work of Cassiodorus –, it seems to confirm the poetic value, but when he evokes the far away and more or less legendary origins of the Goths by resorting to the history of the Dacians and the Getae, Iordanes is looking for a socio-political legitimization of the Goths. Around 551 A.D., Iordanes published his De origine actibusque Getarum (known as Getica), compiling a long Historia Gothorum written by Cassiodorus Senator some twenty years before, around 526 A.D. during the reign of Theodoric. His work signified the birth of a national history of the Goths, but it is a historical narration and an imaginary story at the same time26. The Historia Gothorum compiled by Cassidorus was different from anything that had gone before in Latin historiography, since it tried to show the Goths and their past outside of the Roman Empire and Roman history, where they only appeared as barbarians. Thus, the patriotic historiographical genre reserved exclusively until then for Rome and the Empire was adapted to a barbarian nation which at the time dominated Italy. It is focused on the Goths and no longer on
14 S.H.A., Carac., 10, 6: quod... Gothi Getae dicerentur. 15 ELIADE 1985, 81: “On the three occasions on which, commenting on Virgil, he glosses the term Getae, Servius explains it correctly twice, but, in relation to a passage of the Georgics (IV, 462), he affirms that the Getae were Goths”. 16 EPIPHANES, Adversus haereses, III, 1, 14. 17 PHILOSTORGIUS, Historia ecclesiastica, II, 5. 18 PAULINO DE NOLA, Carm., 17,249; 21, 20; 26, 22. 19 OROSIUS, Hist., 1, 16, 2: modo autem Getae illi qui et nunc Gothi (“but those who today are Goths were in other times the Getae”). 20 CLAUDIANO, De bello Getico (See the index of the Loeb edition, tome 2, 393–394 and 408). 21 Rut. Nam. De reditu suo, 141–142 (ed. FO 1992); see also LANA 1961, 41 and 110. 22 See LEAKE 1967, 25–26 and 155–156. 23 HIERONYMUS, Epist. 106, 1; 107, 2 (for example). In any case, he notes (In. Gen., 10,2) that Getae is the cultured version of Gothi. 24 SIDONIUS APOLLINARIS (see the index of the Loyen edition Tome 3, 237). 25 IORDANES, Get., pref. 1: suades ut nostris verbis duodecim Senatoris volumina de origine actibusque Getarum ab olim et usque nunc… coartem. 26 On Iordanes and the relationship of his work to that of Cassiodorus, see: COURCELLE 1964, 208–209; BRADLEY 1966, 67–69; SVENNUNG, 1967, 5–6 and 136–141; WAGNER 1967, 18–30; SVENNUNG 1969, 71–80; HACHMANN 1970, 15–16; DAGRON 1971, 290–305; REYDELLET 1981, 255–267; TEILLET 1984, 305–334; CROKE 1987, 117–134; GOFFART 1988, 43–44; HEATHER 1989, 103–128; HEATHER 1991, 34–67. 5 Varia hispano-getica 259
Rome, and although there are constant and important allusions to the Romans and their emperors, they are not the obligatory point of reference. The Getica by Iordanes, who was a compiler and a continuator of Cassiodorus, followed this same norm at the same time that he exalted the Goths in a patriotic way. Iordanes here maintains the same attitude as Cassiodorus, inspired in turn by Orosius, of presenting the Goths in a favourable light, such that most of the elements devoted to praise of the Goths in the Getica figure as well in the Historia Gothorum and many of them pertain to Orosius. More data were added on the origins of the Goths and the subsequent history of the Visigoths and Ostrogoths until 540 A.D. The origin of the Goths is manifested in many ways to highlight their antiquity and greatness: the isle of Scandza, Scythia as the ancient home of the Goths and what most interests us, the identification with Getae and Dacians, as coming before Iordanes, as we have seen before, but taken up again by him. The identification of the Getae with other peoples and traditions of Antiquity, sought, as from Cassiodorus, to give the Goths a cultural respectability, showing that they belonged to the main trend of Greco-Roman history, and at the same time was perhaps designed to create a past in which Romans and Goths would have co-existed or their traditions would have been mixed together, in order to justify historically their co-existence in Italy27. In short, the assimilation of the Greco-Roman traditions had a clear purpose in this case, that of seeking the prestige of historical Antiquity and endowing the Goths with a more glorious past, perhaps not yet as political propaganda, since Cassiodorus' glorified history was not subtle or powerful enough to have affected the attitudes and actions of his audience, but it definitely had a purpose: this was not now a matter of a possible initial confusion in the identification of Goths and Getae, but rather that the prolongation of that identification comes within the sphere of an intentional attempt at the legitimization of the Goths. The identification of Getae and Goths followed another, parallel, road to that taken by Cassiodorus and Iordanes, a road that leads us to Hispania, where a whole tradition developed integrating the history of the Dacians and the Getae into the history of the Visigoths and the Spanish. This imaginary history, with the names of important Dacian-Getic people such as Zalmoxis, Burebista, Deceneus or Decebalus, went ahead, appearing in all the chronicles from Isidore of Seville to the archbishop Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada to Alphonse X the Wise. The deeds and names listed were transmitted with alterations from one chronicler to another, new elements appeared and these each time became more and more fabulous28. Paulus Orosius, from his African refuge in the face of the barbarian advance, was to give the prelude to the legend in Hispania, when in his Historiarum adversum paganos libri septem he mentions the following four words: Dacia, ubi et Gothia29. He perhaps borrowed the geographical term Gothia from St. Augustine, who used it in De civitate Dei30. We should also recall another passage from Orosius: modo autem Getae illi qui et nunc Gothi31. But we already know that the identification of Getae and Goths does not appear for the first time in Orosius, and that he could have followed the poet Claudianus in his poem, De bello Getico32, which in turn seems to have
27 MOMIGLIANO 1955, 207–245. 28 We have rescued from oblivion the work of the Romanian Alexandru Busuioceanu, practically unknown in Spain, who devoted his efforts to the study of this topic and published several articles in Spain in the 1950s. Although we do not follow his method or share his objectives, the conclusions of his studies are fundamental. They were compiled and published in Romania by Dan Sluşanschi: BUSUIOCEANU 1985. 29 OROSIUS, Hist., I, 2, 53: „Dacia, where Gothia also is”. 30 AGUSTIN, De civitate Dei, XVIII, 52. 31 OROSIUS, Hist., I, 16, 2: „but those who are Goths today were at another time the Getae”. 32 CLAUDIANO, De bello Getico (see the index of the Loeb edition, Tome 2, 393–394 and 408). 260 Juan Ramón Carbó García 6 followed St. Jerome in his Liber quaestionum Hebraicarum in Genesin33. One of the most curious aspects of Orosius' work is his calling the Dacian king Decebalus as Diurpaneus, the name of another Dacian king known also through other sources34 and which was to become the common name of Decebalus in all the subsequent Hispanic chronicles. Orosius' work was to have large repercussions in the Iberian Peninsula since Isidore of Seville took the identification of Getae and Goths directly from it35. As opposed to the usual efforts to preserve Roman culture and language, Isidore had a completely different attitude to the political order, showing in his historical work a dedication to the destruction of the Roman world, which threatened the new Visigoth nation on the Peninsula in two ways: the first, on a political-military level, was Justinian's attempt to reconquer Hispania for the Byzantine Empire; the second threat was on the ideological plane and therefore perhaps even more dangerous, the myth of Rome, which undoubtedly persisted in the Peninsula. To suppress the latter threat, Isidore, in his Historia Gothorum, sought to replace the myth of Rome with the myth of the Goths, inspired in turn by the ancient myths of the Scythians and the Getae36. The relationship between Goths and Getae – by means of identification with the Getae – became traditional after Orosius, who, as we have seen, was not the first to use it as a poetic option, but did set down its use historically. Isidore took it directly from him37, giving it an etymological basis38. Their identification with Scythians and Getae gave the Goths more antiquity than even Rome itself, thus showing their superiority and respectability, and legitimizing their existence as a kingdom with a good place in history. But in Isidore's work there is not a single mention of the written histories of the Goths in Italy and the East. Not Cassiodorus, or Ablabius, or Dion Chrysostomus, or of course, Iordanes. One can, however, detect certain similarities between the work of the latter and that of Isidore, although there is no relation between them other than some common sources, such as Orosius. Iordanes also used written or oral Gothic sources, such as fables or songs, such that his work to a large extent represents a Gothic historical tradition, whereas that of Isidore of Seville is more a Hispanic historical tradition, already begun by Orosius with respect to the Goths. When Iordanes' work became known in the Iberian Peninsula, around the 13th century, it served as a source, along with the work of Isidore, to definitively integrate the Getic myth and Dacian history into the history of Spain39. The Isidoran tradition was to continue in that century with Bishop Lucas de Tuy. In the first part of his Chronicon Mundi, which is no more than an extension of Isidore's work, Las cuatro edades del Mundo (The Four Ages of the World), we find a whole paragraph about Trajan, more extensive even than the one in Isidore. And in the second book he reproduces Isidore's Historia Gothorum with no modifications, and there again appear elements of
33 HIERONYMUS, In. Gen., 10,2: noting that getae is the cultured version of Gothi. 34 DAICOVICIU/TRYNKOWSKI 1970, 163–166: Duras – Diurpaneus seems to have been, in fact, the uncle and immediate predecessor of Decebalus. 35 ISIDORUS, Etym., 9, 2, 89. 36 TEILLET 1984, 463–464; see also MESSMER 1960. 37 OROSIUS, Hist., 1, 16. 2: modo autem Getae illi qui et nunc Gothi; ISIDORUS, Etym., 9. 2: Gothi... quos ueteres magis Getas quam Gothos uocauerunt; ISIDORUS, Hist. Goth., 2: quos Alexander uitandos pronuntiauit, Pyrrhus pertimuit, Caesar exhorruit (taken from Orosio: Hist. 1, 16, 2). In the historical or epic parts of his work, Isidore uses the term Geticus as the poetic form of Gothicus: in Hist. Goth., recap. 69: Geticae gentis... magnitudinem; 67: Geticis triumphis; in Laus Spaniae: Geticae gentis gloriosa fecunditas. 38 ISIDORUS, Hist. Goth. recap. 66: Gothi de Magog Iaphet filio orti… unde nec longe a uocabulo discrepant: demutata enim ac detracta littera Getae quasi Scythae sunt nuncupati. 39 BUSUIOCEANU 1985, pp. 94–113. 7 Varia hispano-getica 261 the identification between Goths and Getae that Isidore had developed etymologically. In any case, this identification and Isidore's etymological theory about the Getae were to lose their value until the arrival of new sources from outside the Peninsula, such as the work of Iordanes, which were to nourish the chroniclers of that century. Getae and Dacians entered the history of Spain through the Historia Gothica by the Archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, which was completed in 1243 and represented the concept of “national” history for mediaeval peninsular historiography. The new character of Jiménez de Rada's Historia, which was to serve as an example for subsequent historians, can be seen in the act of completing the historical narration with chapters on origins in which, following a variety of sources and traditions, the author goes back to legend and myth. Some of these elements could be found earlier in Orosius, Isidore of Seville and, the closest in time, Lucas de Tuy, but until the work of Jiménez de Rada those legends and myths had not been brought together as a whole nor had they been added to the history of Spain in the form of a chapter on the origins of the Hispanic people. One of the myths – or complex of myths – included is Gothic and above all, as regards our interest here, it verses on the Goths' wisdom, which takes on a moral significance, as it appears in the work of subsequent historians and writers. This is the myth of Deceneus, who was not a Goth but rather Geto-Dacian. Deceneus, the Geto-Dacian high priest in the time of Burebista, in the first century B.C., served Jiménez de Rada as an example of wisdom and good government for the new Hispanic rulers who were heirs to the Gothic tradition transmitted by Isidore. But he also included Zalmoxis, the Geto-Dacian deity, and certain Dacian traditions in the Gothic myth, all of which were elements taken, this time for real, from Iordanes, who had mixed the history of the Goths with those of the Getae and the Dacians in his Getica, as we have seen. Through Iordanes and the independent Hispanic tradition represented by Isidore of Seville, Jiménez de Rada introduced the myth and history of the Getic-Dacians into the history of the Hispanic people40. The Gothic myth related to the origins of the people considered the “founders” of Spain was projected into the history and the reality of the people of the Iberian Peninsula. The identification between Goths and Getae was to attain an even more developed form with Alphonse X the Wise41 and persisted in the writers and historians of the 14th and 15th centuries42.
2. The Yoke and Arrows on the Coat of Arms of the Catholic Monarchs
Now that we have seen how part of the history of the Getae and the Dacians came to be included in the legendary past of the Goths, and have described the coat of arms of the Catholic Monarchs, Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon, it is now time to refer to the emblems chosen for the monarchs and to analyse their significance, symbolism and the traditions that link them to part of Spanish heraldry. Both the yoke and the arrows are symbols that signify at the same time the matrimonial union of the Catholic Monarchs and those of the kingdoms that, by virtue of their marriage, were united under their crowns. Cohesion, unity, strength – these are some of the values they represent. The word “yoke” also refers, with its first letter, to the name “Ysabel”, while the arrows, “flechas” in
40 BUSUIOCEANU 1985, 124–125 and 135–141. 41 ALFONSO X THE WISE, Cron. Gen.: De los sabios de los Godos y de los sos conseieros. 42 ALONSO DE CARTAGENA, Anacephalaeosis. The bishop of Burgos, in times of Enrique IV, in the 15th century, explained that the Spanish monarchs descended from Dacia, from the Getae princes. 262 Juan Ramón Carbó García 8
Spanish, allude to the first letter of Ferdinand. It should be kept in mind that at the time the coat of arms was given, the name “Isabel” began with a “Y”. This is the most well-known explanation about the emblems of Ferdinand and Isabella, the one which is popularly known, and of course the one that is explained by the tourist guides when explaining the yoke and arrows of the Catholic Monarchs that appear on so many historical buildings in Spain. As can be seen, this simplistic explanation tells us only about the meaning of the two symbols (which is rather obvious anyway) and the coincidence – sought by the man who chose the emblems for the Monarchs – between the respective initials of the symbols and those of the Monarchs. Nevertheless, this explanation does not tell us anything about the origins of these symbols or about the traditions they must have been linked to, as any other heraldic element would be. To begin with, the yoke always appears in the lower left-hand part of the coat of arms, joined to what appears to be an untied or cut knot, something which in itself could only be a clue as to the meaning of the symbol, but is much more important in conjunction with the famous motto of the monarchs, known popularly in Spain as the “Tanto monta” associated particularly with King Ferdinand. The big problem with the motto of the Catholic Monarchs is that it is much more well- known in its popular version than in its original version, an invention of the humanist Elio Antonio de Nebrija. The popular saying goes as follows “Tanto monta, monta tanto, Isabel que Fernando” (“It doesn't make any difference whether it's Ferdinand or Isabella; they are both the same” would be a loose translation), and expressed the conviction of the people that there was never a division of tasks between the two monarchs. Isabella was the Queen of Castile but Ferdinand was her King consort and the second in command after the Queen, whereas in the case of Aragon the opposite was true. Some differential aspects could be detected, such as the fact that Ferdinand controlled the military aspect of the campaigns, whereas Isabella imposed sacrificing the reconquest of Rosellón for the war in Granada. But in any case, studying the two monarchs separately is an extremely difficult task. The original motto, which we shall immediately associate with the yoke, was Fig. 1. The Coat of Arms of the Catholic Monarchs with the yoke – on the lower left-hand side –, the invented by Nebrija, in allusion to the well- arrows – on the lower right hand side – and the known anecdote concerning Alexander the motto “Tanto monta”. Great and the Gordian knot. According to this anecdote, the Macedonian king, decided on conquering Persia, was taken before the ox-cart of the old king of Phrygia, Gordium, father of the famous king Midas. The ox-cart, which was in the temple of Zeus in the city of Gordium – named in honour of its old king – was tied to a yoke with a formidable knot and legend had it that the person who managed to untie the knot would have all of Asia at his feet. Of course, Alexander 9 Varia hispano-getica 263 tried to untie it but did not succeed. Furious, he cut the knot with one stroke of his sword. In Nebrija's version, Alexander says: “Tanto monta, claro es, cortar que desatar” (“It's all the same, cutting or untying”) and that is the origin of the motto of the Catholic Monarchs (especially Ferdinand), explicitly associated with the yoke with the cut knot44. In any case, since they were conceived as emblems of Ferdinand and Isabella, the two symbols, whatever their origins, had quite a clear meaning of unity and strength, which was meant to serve as a kind of herald of the qualities of their kingdom and the territories they governed. They were thus the symbol of the matrimonial union of the Catholic Monarchs and of the union of their kingdoms, which, by virtue of their marriage, were united under their two Crowns. We now know the meaning of the two emblems of the monarchs and we also know the origin of the yoke, associated with the motto just mentioned, but we have not yet dealt with the reason for including the yoke, since, like the arrows, it did not appear in any of the coats of arms of preceding monarchs. Antonio de Nebrija picked out an anecdote that happened to a famous historical personage from Antiquity whose nickname speaks for itself of virtues that he may have wished to associate with Ferdinand, although at first we may not realize what this anecdote had to do with the Hispanic tradition of monarchs. But it turns out that Athens had been a Duchy belonging to the Kingdom of Aragon the century before44, and therefore the emblem of the yoke and its association with the Macedonian king could also have indicated a link with Greek historical tradition. Its origin, the relation of the historical tradition with the present of the 15th century and the meaning sought by Nebrija for the Catholic Monarchs… It seems that the case of the yoke is much clearer than that of the bundle of arrows, whose meaning we know but not its origin or the relationship between that origin and the tradition of the Catholic Monarchs, in this case Isabel in particular. If the yoke and the motto “Tanto monta” were more characteristic of Ferdinand, the bundle of interlaced arrows was the personal emblem of the Queen. It should be stressed that both emblems are always displayed together, the one next to the other, but never joined together or superimposed. The true mystery seems to lie in the bundle of interlaced arrows, since there does not seem to be any clear clue and there is no motto or slogan, as in the former case, that can lead us to an explanation. But we have already mentioned that heraldry does not admit inventions, and is always linked to traditions. In this case we should try to find its origin and meaning through the tradition that serves as a source for the Catholic Monarchs and especially Isabella, a Gothic tradition directly related to the rise in Neo-Gothic ideals, understood as a legacy of Gothic Hispania, which, as we have seen, was to have great importance in 15th century Castile. When in 1445 Enrique IV ascended to the throne, these ideals were widespread, i.e. that the monarchs of Castile were in charge of re-unifying what was conceived of as the glorious kingdom of the Visigoths on the Peninsula. From the very beginning, in the 11th century, first the Asturian monarchs and then those of Leon were considered to be the continuators of the Gothic monarchs, the Gothic tradition being present in diverse aspects of Spanish life. The nobles of the Middle Ages attributed themselves with Visigothic ancestry and until the age we are dealing with here, the reign of the Catholic Monarchs, the monarchy aspired to restore the territory of the Gothic kingdom45.
43 For the passage on the Gordian knot see: QUINTUS CURTIUS RUFUS, History of Alexander the Great, III, 1, 14–18. 44 Although only for a short time, between 1380 and 1388 (or 1390, according to some authors). 45 It should be noted that we use the term “restoration” and not “reconquest”. The mediaeval Spanish kingdoms up to the Catholic Monarchs are linked to the Gothic tradition, but there was a discontinuity with the Visigoth Kingdom of Toledo. The idea of Reconquest, as it was applied in historiography up until about a decade ago, seems to be now completely phased out. 264 Juan Ramón Carbó García 10
As Rafael González has pointed out in his studies, diverse historians and political writers of different ages have highlighted and even exalted the Gothic origin of the Spanish monarchy and society, and in this respect, it is relevant that the official title of the Gothic monarchs was held by Spanish monarchs until nothing less than the Constitution of 181246. And within the Falangist tendencies which we shall deal with in the next section, some writers also spoke of the Gothic ancestry of the Spanish in the context of the fight between the “National” side and the Republicans47. But we must return to the 15th century. In 1445, on the death of Juan II – father of Enrique IV and Isabella – Alonso (or Alfonso) of Cartagena, bishop of Burgos, referred to the Goth ancestry of the dead king, with a continuity that went back to Alaric and even further, through the mythical genealogies of the Goths, an imaginary creation that pointed to the union of the different kingdoms of the Peninsula as their historical destiny. The force of the Neo-Gothic conception, that ideological platform that made the era of the Catholic Monarchs a time of restoration, did not diminish with the passage of time. Neo-Gothicism was based on the existence of a legitimizing principle of the authority of the Visigothic monarchs, since they were the only people among the barbarians to whom the Roman Empire had made a regular transmission of power, with the Pact of 418 between Valia and the Roman emperors of the Western and Eastern Empires. According to the long ancestry proclaimed by Alonso of Cartagena, this power had been transmitted from Ataulf to the Trastamara sovereigns. As regards Neo-Gothicism, Castile would maintain this idea of peninsular unity which only surpassed the ideal and theoretical plane when Ferdinand and Isabella finally put it into practice48. If we take into account these Neo-Gothic ideals that impregnated Castilian thought -and also that of other kingdoms, although to a lesser extent- it seems logical that Isabella would seek a motif that would link up with that Gothic tradition reigning in Castile for her personal emblem that was to appear next to the yoke of her husband Ferdinand and for her coat of arms in all the territories governed by them. It would seem, for the moment, that the hypothesis of the Gothic tradition with which the bundle of arrows is related could be valid. But the following questions are inevitable: is there any certifiable relationship between the Goths and the arrows, in general? And above all, is there any testimony that identifies this symbol with the Goths? Our hypothesis could in no case be accepted unless we were able to respond affirmatively to these two important questions. However, we believe it is advisable to answer the second question first, since the first question will take us to the nucleus of the problem of the origin of the emblem. We therefore turn to the travel literature of the Modern Age to find, in the 17th century, the narration that Cosimo de Medici of the Florentine Medici family makes of his travels throughout Spain. His trip took him to Toledo and he found himself before the church of San Juan de los Reyes – on its left side, to be exact – contemplating the coat of arms of the Catholic Monarchs, of which he says:
46 GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ 1986, 289–300; GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ 1985. See also: SUÁREZ/ CARRIAZO 1969, XII-XV and 6–7; LADERO QUESADA 1999; RUCQUOI 1992, 341–352; REDONDO 1992, 353–364; ARMOGATHE 1992, 383–388; TATE 1970; MARAVALL 1981, 299–337; MESSMER 1960. 47 GIMÉNEZ CABALLERO 1945 (with commentary by GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ 1986, 298, note 3): “In this work he identifies the “Nationals” with the “liberating race that came from the North”, as opposed to the race of the “Reds” or liberated ones, a tradition which, for him, comes from the Middle Ages, when the two Hispanic races co-existed: the one descended from the Goths and the servile one (heretic and damned), descended from Jews and Arabs”. 48 MENÉNDEZ PIDAL 1969, XIII: the Asturian monarchs claimed to have descended from Leovigild and Recaredus. 11 Varia hispano-getica 265
Fig. 2. The coat of arms on the church of San Juan de los Reyes, in Toledo, which Cosimo de Medici visited. Observe the yoke and arrows located below the sides of the shield, which is from the pre- conquest of the Nazari Kingdom of Granada, since the pomegranate is missing in the lower part. 266 Juan Ramón Carbó García 12
“...Vi sono per ornamento l´insegne de´ Goti cioè saette e giogo all usanza degli Sciti, come Quinto Curzio riferisce, dicendose che i Re di Castiglia volessero conservar segno di discendenza da medesimi Goti.” (“I saw on this shield the insignia of the Goths, the arrows and yoke from Scythian customs, as Quintus Curtius relates, saying that the King of Castile wanted to preserve the sign of his descendance from the Goths”)49
Cosimo identified both emblems, the yoke and the arrows, with Gothic symbols, and like us, he observes that the King of Castile (actually Isabella) had taken them up with the clear intention of connecting to the Gothic tradition and thus show that he descended from those Visigothic monarchs. But besides providing us with the testimony we needed to finally relate the bundle of arrows with the Goths, the Florentine contributes an extremely interesting piece of information about the initial origin of this symbol when he says “...all usanza degli Sciti...” And what relationship was there between the Scythians and the Goths? This question brings us directly to the historiographic problem we approached in the first section of this study and furthermore answers that first question we formulated, of whether there was some relation between the Goths and the arrows, in general. This problem is none other than that of the mythical confusion and identification, in all of the historiography of Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages between Goths, Scythians and Getae. Cosimo de Medici refers to Quintus Curtius Rufus, the author of the History of Alexander the Great, which we have also mentioned above. That mention is an allusion to an early chapter, lost but known by other authors who wrote about Alexander – such as Plutarch – and in which the Macedonian makes a military raid on the country of the Getae, located for the most part to the south of the lower Danube. The confusion in this reference by Cosimo de Medici is between Getae and Scythians, but at the time of Alexander these two peoples lived in adjoining territories that in practice already formed part of the vast and unknown geographic area known as Scythia. The fame of the bows and arrows of the Getae is documented in the references of authors from Antiquity. Lucan, for example, extols the fame of the Getae bow and his verses were later repeated by Isidore of Seville y other authors: “Armeniosque arcus Geticis intendite neruis”50. Seneca speaks of the terrible arrows of the Getae, elevating them to the heavens: “...talis in coelum exilit arundo Getica visa dimitti manu”51. And in a time and place that are significant for our study, the 13th century in the Iberian Peninsula, the Getae entered the history of Spain through the Historia Gothica of the archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, who stated in his work that “hacían arcos con cuerdas con gran maestría” (They made bows with strings with great mastery), and then immediately afterwards quotes Lucan's verses that refer to this information and which we quoted above: “Y tensad los armenios arcos con las cuerdas de los getas” (and you tighten the Armenian bows with the strings of the Getae)52. This passage well illustrates the confusion between Goths and Getae starting in Antiquity, and is apropos of the topic that interests us here.
49 COSIMO DE MEDICI, quoted by BUSUIOCEANU 1985, 186. 50 LUCAN, Pharsalia, VIII, 221. 51 SENECA, Hercules Oetaeus, 818–819. Seneca seems to base himself on Herodotus' well-known passage in which, speaking of the deities of the Getae, he mentions that “every time there is thunder or lightening, they shoot arrows into the sky, indignant with the heavens, at the same time that they threaten the deity, since they do not believe in any other god but their own” (HERODOTUS, History, IV, 94). It seems that they believed this because the god they recognized, Zalmoxis, among other things was a sky god and had other means to communicate with them, and thus thunder and lightening were considered to be the false manifestations of a deceiving god. 52 RODRIGO JIMÉNEZ DE RADA, Historia Gothorum, I, 10, 31. 13 Varia hispano-getica 267
Taking into account the existence of this long tradition of identification of Goths, Getae and Scythians, and the line of reasoning we have been presenting in these pages, it seems that the true origin of the bundle of arrows lies in the references to the famous capability of the Getae with these weapons. We can therefore establish the beginning and end of this line of transmission in the following way: 1) the Getae appear in the sources as large and brave warriors whose handling of the bow and arrows is worthy of renown; 2) the Getae and their history (along with that of the Dacians) were assimilated by the historians and writers of Antiquity to the mythical past of the Goths. At first through confusion and then in search of historical legitimization, especially at the hand of the Gothic historian Iordanes; 3) the myth of the Getae is included in the history of the Visigoths in Hispania by Isidore of Seville and other writers; 4) the myth of the Goths, with the myth of the Getae included in it, was recovered by writers such as Lucas of Tuy or Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, and later by Alphonse X the Wise; 5) the Neo-Gothic ideals are reinforced in Castile and to a lesser extent in the rest of the Christian kingdoms in the Peninsula; 6) for the emblem of Queen Isabella a symbol was recovered which had links to the Gothic tradition, but which turns out to be of unsuspected Getic origin (the placing of the arrows in a bundle is simply an attempt to reinforce the message of unity and strength, just like the yoke of Ferdinand, the origin of which can be found in the anecdote of the Gordian knot. This was in turn linked to the Greek tradition to which it was supposed to allude in relation to the brief period of time when the Duchy of Athens belonged to the Crown of Aragon and which we know because of the motto “Tanto monta”). And if simple logic, which argues in favour of the search for a link between the symbol of the arrows and the Gothic tradition, were not enough, we should remember that Cosimo de Medici identified the emblems as Gothic, noting the intention of preserving a symbol of Gothic ancestry. Anecdotally we should add that the yoke and arrows, as the emblem of the Catholic Monarchs, crossed the Atlantic to become part of the coat of arms of Puerto Rico, which was discovered under their reign, under the initials of both monarchs. There is a seventh step left in this line of transmission, which we mentioned earlier, and that is the recovery of the symbols of the yoke and arrows by the Falange (the Spanish Fascist party) during the Second Republic. We shall dedicate the Fig. 3. The coat of arms of Puerto Rico, with the third and final section of our study to this topic. emblems and initials of the Catholic Monarchs.
3. The Yoke and Arrows as the Symbol of the Falangists in Spain
The name “Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista (J.O.N.S.)” (Councils for the National-Syndicalist Offensive) of the Spanish Falange was proposed by Ramiro Ledesma and as their emblem they adopted the bundle of five arrows crossed by a yoke. The choice of this emblem for the Spanish Falange and the “J.O.N.S.” is a curious one. Juan Aparicio López, who had studied Law at the University of Granada, recalled that Fernando de los Ríos, a Socialist leader, lecturing one day from his Chair in Political Law on the Italian 268 Juan Ramón Carbó García 14
Fascist state, after alluding to the emblem of the Roman lictors -the fasces with the bundle of rods and the axe –, drew on the board the bundle of arrows and a yoke. He then said that this would have been the emblem of fascism had it arisen in Spain, as a symbol of unity and recovery of the glorious past of Ferdinand and Isabella. There were other proposals, but in the end the symbol that was chosen was a superposition of the yoke on a bundle of five arrows. And in spite of the fact that the yoke and arrows were on the seal of the Catholic Monarchs and therefore figured as the royal emblem on many buildings at the time, nobody understood the meaning of the emblem adopted by the Falange. For example, the group of Falangists from Valladolid, whose founders all had a reactionary education, were puzzled by the emblem of the yoke and arrows when it came from Madrid, in spite of the fact that there were numerous examples of the yokes and arrows of the Catholic Monarchs on many historical buildings in Valladolid, such as the Castle of Mota, or a patio in the famous convent of St. Gregory53. The Falangist movement, when taking on the emblem of the yoke and arrows with the same meaning they had separately in the era of the Catholic Monarchs, related it to the historical tradition of the two monarchs and also attempted to find its origin. The Falangists, especially Juan Aparicio López, creator of the symbol for the Spanish Falange and Councils for the National-Syndicalist Offensive, located the origin of the yoke and arrows in Virgil, as a symbol of Imperial Rome when it overcame a period of anarchy. According to him, the yoke would have come from the Georgics, and the arrows from the Aeniad and Nebrija must have taken them from there to propose them to the Catholic Monarchs as a symbol of unity after the decadent period under Enrique IV54. We can make several objections to this respect and the first is that we now know where Nebrija took the yoke from: the ox-cart of the Gordian knot, which has nothing to do with the yoke employed in agricultural work, to which Virgil refers Fig. 4. The yoke and arrows of the J.O.N.S., in the Georgics; the arrows that appear in the Aeniad always superposed and always with 5 arrows, whereas in the emblem of the Catholic do not seem to have anything to do with the Hispanic Monarchs the number of arrows varies. tradition and no reason can be found as to why Nebrija would have taken them from Virgil instead of elsewhere; it was favourable to the Falangists at that time to associate the yoke and arrows with Roman tradition, besides with Ferdinand and Isabella, since Italian fascism, with its fasces and the axes, made a direct allusion to the symbols of the empire that the Roman lictors used to carry and in this way they sought some kind of brotherhood with the Italian fascist movement; Nebrija, on the other hand, was a humanist – he was in contact with trends of the Renaissance and this may explain the choice of a symbol from Greek antiquity, which could be linked with Hispanic heraldic tradition through the fact that the Duchy of Athens had previously belonged to the
53 About the conception of the symbol by the Falangists Juan Aparicio López and Rafael Sánchez Mazas, see: APARICIO LÓPEZ 1933, 14; SÁNCHEZ MAZAS 1933, 8 (fragment of a lecture given in Santander and published in the Boletín de la Biblioteca Menéndez Pelayo, in 1927). 54 BORRÁS 1971, 304–306: reproduces an interview with Juan Aparicio López by Pedro Rodríguez in Arriba, in 1967. 15 Varia hispano-getica 269
Crown of Aragon, as we saw above; if Virgil is rejected as a source for the yoke, it would make even less sense to accept him as a source for the bundle of arrows; finally, Nebrija could not have offered Isabella an emblem joined to Roman tradition when the reigning trend in Castile during the whole 15th century was the extolling of Neo-Gothic ideals. * It is surprising that, although they were seeking to reaffirm the messages of unity and strength and were only taking up again the tradition of the Catholic Monarchs, a symbol whose origin could have been in the references to the Getae in ancient sources ended up being the symbol of the Spanish Falange. For their part, Ferdinand and Isabella themselves, while wishing to transmit the same meaning, found support in the Gothic tradition prevailing at that time in Castile. But the origin, that confusing and obscure origin of the bundle of arrows, seems to go back to the Getae in the last centuries B.C. and in the confusion emanating from the sources from Antiquity, Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages that led to the identification of Getae, Scythians and Goths.
ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
APARICIO LÓPEZ 1933 J. APARICIO LÓPEZ, El emblema de las J.O.N.S. El Fascio 1 (Madrid 1933), 14. ARMOGATHE 1992 J.-R. ARMOGATHE, L'Espagne wisigothique et la conscience politique européenne dans la première moitié du XVII e siècle. In L´Europe héritière de l´Espagne Wisigothique [Collection de la Casa de Velázquez 35] (Madrid 1992), 383–388. BORRÁS 1971 T. BORRÁS, Ramiro Ledesma Ramos (Madrid 1971). BRADLEY 1966 D.R. BRADLEY, The composition of the Getica. Eranos 64, 67–69. BUSUIOCEANU 1985 A. BUSUIOCEANU, Zamolxis sau mitul dacic în istoria şi legendele spaniole (Bucureşti 1985). CANDAU/GONZÁLEZ/CRUZ 2004 J.M. CANDAU MORÓN, F.J. GONZÁLEZ PONCE, G. CRUZ ANDREOTI, Historia y mito. In El pasado legendario como fuente de autoridad. Actas del Simposio Internacional de Sevilla, Valverde del Camino y Huelva, 22–25 de abril de 2003 (Málaga 2004). CARBÓ GARCÍA 2004 J.R. CARBÓ GARCÍA, Godos y getas en la historiografía de la Tardoantigüedad y del Medievo: un problema de identidad y de legitimación socio-política. Stud.Hist. Histor. Antig. 22, 2004, 179–206. COURCELLE 1964 P. COURCELLE, Histoire littéraire des grandes invasions germaniques (Paris 1964). CROKE 1987 B. CROKE, Cassiodorus and the Getica of Iordanes. Class. Philol. 82, 1987, 117–134. DAGRON 1971 G. DAGRON, Discours utopique et récit des origines. 1 – Une lecture de Cassiodore-Iordanes: les Goths de Scandza à Ravenne. Ann. Écon. Soc. Civil. 26/2, 1971, 290–305. DAICOVICIU/TRYNKOWSKI 1970 H. DAICOVICIU, J. TRYNKOWSKI, Les rois daces de Burebista à Décébale. Dacia N.S. 14, 1970, 163–166. DENIZE 1986 E. DENIZE, Românii în cultura medievală spaniolă. Anu. Inst. Istor. “A. D. Xenopol” 23, 1986, 75–82. 270 Juan Ramón Carbó García 16
DOMINGUEZ CASAS 1993 R. DOMÍNGUEZ CASAS, Arte y etiqueta de los Reyes Católicos: artistas, residencias, jardines y bosques (Madrid 1993). ELIADE 1985 M. ELIADE, De Zalmoxis a Gengis-Khan. Religiones y folklore de la Dacia y de la Europa Oriental (Madrid 1985). FO 1992 A. FO, Rutilio Namaziano. Il Ritorno (Torino 1992). GEARY 1983 P. GEARY, Ethnic identity as a situational construct in the Early Middle Ages. Mitt. Anthr. Ges. Wien 113, 1983, 15–26. GIMÉNEZ CABALLERO 1945 E. GIMÉNEZ CABALLERO, Afirmaciones sobre Asturias (Oviedo 1945). GOFFART 1988 W. GOFFART, The Narrators of Barbarian History (Princeton 1988). GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ 1985 R. GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ, El tema gótico en la historiografía española de los siglos XV al XVIII, (unedited Grade Memory) (Universidad de Murcia 1985). GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ 1986 R. GONZÁLEZ FERNÁNDEZ, El mito gótico en la historiografía del siglo XV. In Los visigodos. Historia y civilización [Antigüedad y Cristianismo 3] (Murcia 1986) 289–300. GONZÁLEZ/MARTÍNEZ 2002 E. GONZÁLEZ DÍEZ, F.J. MARTÍNEZ LLORENTE, El blasón heráldico de los Reinos de León y Castilla (Valladolid 2002). HACHMANN 1970 R. HACHMANN, Goten und Skandinavien (Berlin 1970). HEATHER 1989 P. HEATHER, Cassiodorus and the Rise of the Amals Genealogy and the Goths under Hun Domination. Journal Roman Stud. 79, 1989, 103–128. HEATHER 1991 P. HEATHER, Goths and Romans (332–489) (Oxford 1991). HEATHER 1999 P. HEATHER, The Creation of the Visigoths. In P. Heather (ed.), The Visigoths from the Migration to the Seventh Century. An Ethnographic Perspective (Woodbridge 1999), 351–356. HEDEAGER 1993 L. HEDEAGER, The Creation of Germanic Identity. A European Origin-myth. In P. Brun, S. Van Der Leeuw, C. Whittaker, (eds.), Frontiéres d´Empire. Nature et signification des frontiéres romaines [Mémories du Musée de Préhistoire d´Ille-de-France 5] (Nemours 1993), 121–132. HEDEAGER 2000 L. HEDEAGER, Migration Period Europe: the Formation of a Political Mentality. In F. Theuws, J.L. Nelson (eds.), Rituals of Power: From Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages (Leiden-Boston- Köln 2000), 15–57. HOBSBAWN 1995 E. HOBSBAWN, Introduction: Inventing Traditions. In E. Hobsbawn, T. Ranger (eds.), The Invention of Traditions, 2nd ed. (Cambridge 1995), 1–14. LADERO QUESADA 1999 M.A. LADERO QUESADA, La España de los Reyes Católicos (Madrid 1999). LANA 1961 I. LANA, Rutilio Namaziano (Torino 1961). LEAKE 1967 J.A. LEAKE, The Geats of Beowulf (Madison 1967). 17 Varia hispano-getica 271
LIÑÁN Y EGUIZÁBAL 1994 J. de LIÑÁN Y EGUIZÁBAL, Diccionario de lemas heráldicos (Zaragoza 1994). MANN 1986 M. MANN, The sources of social power. A history of power from the beginning to AD 1760 (Cambridge 1986). MARAVALL 1981 J.A. MARAVALL, El concepto de España en la Edad Media, 1st ed. (Madrid 1981). MENÉNDEZ PIDAL 1969 R. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, Introducción. In L. Suárez Fernández, J.M. Carriazo Arroquia (eds.), La España de los Reyes Católicos (1474–1516) [Vol. 1: Historia de España. XVII] (Madrid 1969). MENÉNDEZ PIDAL 1999 F. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL DE NAVASCUES, Leones y castillos: emblemas heráldicos en España (Madrid 1999). MESSMER 1960 H. MESSMER, Hispania-Idee und Gotenmythos. Chap 2: Isidor und die Gestaltung des Gotenmythos (Zürich 1960). MOMIGLIANO 1955 A. MOMIGLIANO, Cassiodorus and the Italian Culture of His Time. Proc. Brit. Acad. 41, 1955, 207–245. PARDO DE GUEVARA 1987 E. PARDO DE GUEVARA Y VALDÉS, Manual de Heráldica española (Madrid 1987). PETOLESCU 1983 C.C. PETOLESCU, Varia Daco-Romana (VI): Confuzia între geţi şi goţi în antichitatea tîrzie. Thraco-Dacica 4, 1983, 147–149. REDONDO 1992 A. REDONDO, Les divers visages du thème (wisi)gothique dans l´Espagne des XVIe et XVIIe siècles. In L´Europe héritière de l´Espagne Wisigothique [Collection de la Casa de Velázquez 35] (Madrid 1992), 353–364. REYDELLET 1981 M. REYDELLET, La royautè dans la littérature latina de Sidoine Apollinaire à Isidore de Sèville (Rome 1981). RIQUER 1986 M. DE RIQUER, Heráldica castellana en tiempos de los Reyes Católicos (Barcelona 1986). RUCQUOI 1992 A. RUCQUOI, Les Wisigoths fondement de la <
TONKIN 1995 E. TONKIN, Narrating Our Pasts. The Social Construction of Oral History (Cambridge 1995). VANSINA 1965 J. VANSINA, Oral tradition. A Study in Historical Methodology (London 1965). VANSINA 1985 J. VANSINA, Oral Tradition as History (London 1985). VON SYBEL 1847 H. VON SYBEL, Zu dem Aufsatz: Geten und Gothen. Zeitschr. Gesch. 7, 1847, 288–296. WAGNER 1967 N. WAGNER, Getica. Untersuchungen zum Leben des Iordanes und zur frühen Geschichte der Goten [Quellen und Forschungen zur Sprach- und Julturgeschichte der germanischen Völker, N.F. 22] (Berlin 1967), 18–30.