Visigothic Kingdom: Power, Politics, and Transition
ITEM 9. Visigothic State: Policy Formation and Structure
In the Visigothic Hispanic kingdom, particularistic tendencies coexisted. Although some areas under Visigothic rule exerted force against the monarchy, the core issue was political, regardless of whether Visigothic reality was based on political or private ties. In the 20th century, two historians challenged the idea of a dual sphere of public and private political power. They argued this wasn’t derived from Germanic traditions but rather Roman origins, and that the monarchy was conceived as a single, central power within the empire.
Sánchez Albornoz maintained that subjects were integrated into the Visigothic state not through public bonds but through ties of military clientele. The king, at the top of the pyramid, maintained loyalty with his clientele, and this structure remained largely unchanged. This thesis, however, is challenged by historians like Torres López, who argues that Sánchez Albornoz’s view relies on the flawed belief that primitive Germanic institutions, which hadn’t survived and weren’t even solely based on private ties, persisted. Upon reaching the Iberian Peninsula, private oaths of loyalty between individuals overlapped with a public oath requiring all subjects to be faithful to the state. This is evidenced by the oath of allegiance given by monarchs upon accession in Toledo.
The Visigoths had their own political organization when they settled in the peninsula, distinct from Roman rule. Two political organizations coexisted: the Roman Empire and the Visigothic structure. The emperor granted the Gothic king the office of praetor precept, among others. This duality disappeared with the establishment of the Kingdom of Toulouse and later Toledo, which, according to López Torres, was based on a political idea separating public and private spheres.
The King and the Kingdom
Initially, the Visigothic monarch had limited power. The power structure consisted of free men, and to ensure stability, the monarch’s authority was restricted. This characteristic persisted while the people lived outside Roman towns. However, as Germanic influence interacted with Roman and canonical elements, the monarchy transformed significantly. With the decline of the Roman Empire, the king gained full power, particularly in the Iberian Peninsula, where Roman political and ecclesiastical influence was stronger.
At times, the monarchy relied on the nobility or the church for support. Succession to the throne was elective but limited to a specific family. According to García Gaius’s theory of the family circle, succession prioritized the king’s family, followed by grandsons, and then other males. Husbands of the king’s daughters were considered equivalent to the king’s children and eligible for selection. Initially, figures like Alano and Ataulfo were elected, but the system later evolved, allowing for greater freedom of choice.
Power was conferred through symbolic acts like coronation and accession to the throne. These rituals, including the anointing and bestowal of symbolic attributes, held significant importance. The oath of allegiance, sworn by both the sovereign and the subjects, remained crucial. Potential kings had to be of Gothic and noble lineage, and could be Roman, Hispanic, or even of other origins, as long as they were free men. The queen held no political role. The Church played an increasingly important role, mediating between the king and his subjects, promoting peace among clienteles, and emphasizing the importance of God, to whom the king was ultimately accountable.