[gothic-l] Re: Visigoths

[ingemar.nordgren at EBOX.TNINET.SE]

--- In gothic-l at y..., dirk at s... wrote:

Hello Dirk,
You wrote:
> Hello Ingemar and thanks for your reply,
>
> is that really the case that the economy of the Visigothic state
> depended so much on the Jewish population? I would have thought that
> the Visigothic economy was overwhelmingly based on agriculture, as
> indeed most, if not all western European economies at this time
were.
> Thus, if there was continuity from late anitquity, the Visigothic
> economy was likely based on the activity of large agricultural
> estates, which generated most of the wealth and which were largely
> controlled by the Visigothic elites.
>
> The Jewish population probably dominated trade and especially the
> long-distance trade, which satisfied the demand for luxurious
> goods that these Visigothic landowners developed. But at any rate,
> trade and commerce was probably only a small share of the annual
> domestic product of the state. Thus, while Jews may have dominated
the
> trade sector and were important for the overall economy, I don't
think
> that the economy depended on their activity in the same way as it
> depended on the activity of these agricultural estates.

Of course agriculture was in bottom but with so powerful a group as
the Jews and their importance for over all economy they definitely had
influence. A weakness with the estates were that a great part of the
labour were slaves and more so when making the Jews slaves. It means
many lacked motivation to oppose the Arabs and many had reason to
support them. This weakens the state as  does also the  loss of a
special faith as ethnic glue.


> During
> > Arianism the Jews were well treated and had freedom of religion
with
> > special protection from the kings. Arianism was very tolerant
toward
> > other faiths (except by the Vandals) but the main point from the
> pope to
> > get influence in the Visigothic state by converting Reccared was
to
> > start persecuting the Jews. Hence anti-semitism and Catholicism
goes
> > hand in hand.
>
>
> Is there real evidence that Arianism was tolerant, while Catholicism
> was accompanied by religious intolerance and anti-semitism in the
6th
> and 7th centuries? You already mentioned the Arian Vandals, who were
> anything but religiously tolerant but infact notorious for their
> persecution of Catholics, while Jews enjoyed royal protection for
> example, by the Catholic Ottonen-Emperors in the 10th century.

I suggest you read Dietrich Claudes books. He is very clear in that
question. What concerns the Ottonen emperors they in practice had
close connections with the Eastern Orthodox church and Otto II was
married to a Byzantinian Princess. Otto III used the Eastern
Byzantinian Mass ritual so I am not sure you could call them Catholic
in the sense they followed the dictates of the Dictator in Rome, more
likely the Patriarch in Constantinople. Soon after in 1054 the real
split happened in the Filioque-question. The most liberal Catholic
emperor was Fredrik II Hohenstaufen of the old Normandic Altavilla
descent, who was dethroned by the pope for not being enough interested
in killing arabs on crusades.

I say that we have to agree to disagree if you disagree also to this
but that is the nature of scientific debate, isn't it?

Kindly
Ingemar


You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.
Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/