Emperor Goblinus Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 One thing that is always stated about Trajan is that while he was the first emperor not to have been born in Italy, his family had Italian roots. Considering that the Ulpians had migrated to Spain in the third century BC, there was a more than 400-year old gap between Trajan and his Italian ancestors. Considering that Spain was still very much barbarian territory in the third century, and that the Roman presence would have been minimal at first, it just doesn't make sense to put that much influence on his Italian roots. Yes, the family was originally from Italy, but there had to have been significant intermixing with the local Celtiberian population. Not immediately, but as Spain calmed down, greater connections were forged between the people and the Hispano-Roman culture developed. I would not be surprised if Trajan had a majority Celtic blood, just that the Celts in his family had been Romanized and adopted the history of the Italian side of the family. For all we know, Trajan's early life may have been steeped in Celtiberian cultural customs. This would of course had been in a Latinized Roman context, but it definitely would not have been pure Italian. I can't help but think that the emphasis on his Italianess was probably for political purposes only. To get on to my second question, how important was it for Trajan to play down his provincial roots? Being the first non-Italian emperor would have been a bit tricky at first, especially from the point of view of the Italian senatorial aristocracy. Nevertheless, Spain was an almost fully Latinized part of the empire by the time of Trajan's ascension, and had been the home to several prominent Romans. I can see how things might have been an issue had he been from Germania Inferior, but Spain was as Romanized as Italy, Gallia Transalpina, and North Africa. I can't help but wonder if the emphasis on Trajan's Italian origins was something made up by historians, and did not reflect the realities of the time. Thoughts? (yes, I'm making alot of threads today ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caius Maxentius Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 These are interesting questions. Trajan was presumably from a long line of patricians, and the upper class in the Roman world was pretty culturally homogenous, was it not? I don't know if there would actually have been much Celt-Iberian cultural upbringing here: that would have been the culture of the peasant class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Goblinus Posted November 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 But as local rulers were raised to senatorial status, they would have been the social equals of original Romans. I'm not saying that there was no social friction, but at least by the time of Augustus, intermarriages between Roman elite families and Spanish nobility would probably not have been scandalous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmo Posted November 12, 2011 Report Share Posted November 12, 2011 Celtic influence never extended as far south as Baetica. The region was inhabited by Iberian Turdetani, descendants of the Tartessians. They were fairly urbanized and sophisticated and had strong connections with Carthaginians and even Greeks before Roman conquest. It is easy to see why these developed people where quick to become romanized. Probably the iberic culture was still present by the time of Trajan but I doubt that it was very relevant for the son of a consul from the gens Ulpia who was related with many members of the roman aristocracy in Baetica including the families to whom later emperors Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius belonged. Probably there was some gene mixing even at the top provincial level (with Turdetani not Celts) but that is much less important then roman cultural supremacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted November 12, 2011 Report Share Posted November 12, 2011 Celtic influence never extended as far south as Baetica. The region was inhabited by Iberian Turdetani, descendants of the Tartessians. They were fairly urbanized and sophisticated and had strong connections with Carthaginians and even Greeks before Roman conquest. It is easy to see why these developed people where quick to become romanized. I would normally argue, on the contrary, that earlier urbanized (and civilized) societies seems to have been harder to Romanize than the less developed areas of the empire. It is, of course, possible that the mix between local, barbarian, culture and less sophisticated urban societeies in Spain presented a good breading ground for it. Anyway, I would love to hear more of your thoughts on the topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryaxis Hecatee Posted November 12, 2011 Report Share Posted November 12, 2011 With the family origins that Trajan had, one must presume that most of the brides of his family in the last century (or at least since they got the equestrian rank) would have been found in Rome or at least Italy, while his ancestors made their career : their wifes would mostly be the sisters or daughters of officers they met in the army, of roman officials based in the province, or members of roman families who would only be wed to such as mentionned above. I would see very little indigeneous blood in those families. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polybius Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 I would normally argue, on the contrary, that earlier urbanized (and civilized) societies seems to have been harder to Romanize than the less developed areas of the empire. I don't think history supports that viewpoint - Spaniards seem to have clung to Roman lifestyles and traditions longer than most, once their initial reluctance was overcome in the late 3rd C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted November 23, 2011 Report Share Posted November 23, 2011 I would normally argue, on the contrary, that earlier urbanized (and civilized) societies seems to have been harder to Romanize than the less developed areas of the empire. I don't think history supports that viewpoint - Spaniards seem to have clung to Roman lifestyles and traditions longer than most, once their initial reluctance was overcome in the late 3rd C. Well, I would normally consider Spain one of the less urbanized and "civilized" (may the Gods of scholarly works forgive me for that term) pre-Roman areas of the Empire. This is the point I would like to empathize rather than how romanized they were in later times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melvadius Posted November 23, 2011 Report Share Posted November 23, 2011 I'm not sure that the general urbanisation or lack thereof in Spain really comes into the question of how 'Italian' Trajan may have felt. Wikipedia opens its description of the town as The city of Italica (Spanish: It Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.