Life of Viriathus - timeline

Feb 2019
526
Thrace
Indeed so and I think even Augustus got impacient and left it to the generals (cant remember who).

Funny how in hindsight we always look on people who brought death and destruction to their peoples as heroes. But I suppose we've never heard of the many leaders who did the sensible thing?

And I still don't agree it was anything to do with the history of Portugal, which only formed 1000 years later. Unless you are talking about the history of the 'space'!
Considering what Galba did a few years earlier, it's understandable how Viriathus roused his men to continue the resistance against Roman expansion instead of surrendering to Vetilius. And the Luitanians were more successful with him as their leader then ever before or since. No point in downplaying his skills.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,000
Portugal
Ok, centuries was an exaggeration, but the Spanish tribes weren't conclusively finished off until the time of Augustus well over 100 years later, and the total period of turmoil in Spain is close to 2 centuries. The tribes were rebellious, and to attribute that to Viriathus is silly. He joined an existing rebellion, and after he was gone that existing rebellion continued for a long time on and off, as it had before.
Caesarmagnus,

I think that is the first time that I am interacting with you on this Forum, and pardon me the off topic answer, since that most of my answer doesn’t have nothing to do with Viriathus, it has to do with the logic of this post of yours (and also the last one), that has a few logic errors that I find interesting to point, even if I am terribly bad at logic. So this is also for me an exercise on the theme.

On logic, case 1, let me start with this sentence:

“The tribes were rebellious, and to attribute that to Viriathus is silly.”

Who made a silly statement? Since I didn’t read here nobody claiming that “the Spanish tribes were rebellious due to Viriathus”, I found the negation of that claim an oddity. You are trying a "reductio ad absurdum" when nobody made the “absurdum” claim.

And this is even if we consider that the premisse “Spanish tribes were rebellious” is a true statement. And I will get to the premise later.

Historum guidelines: https://historum.com/threads/on-posting-a-guide.46025/, see post 9 and the link that exists there. It links you to a site that has an interesting list of fallacies. Often they are known by different names, according to the language, so I have some difficulties in translation, but I will give it a try.

So, basically since nobody claimed that “absurdum”, let us call it position “Y”, you are using this fallacy:


1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.


From the mention link: Fallacy: Straw Man

So, we have something like:

1. Tulius has the position that Viriathus is a relevant character to understand the Lusitanians, the Lusitanian Wars, and Rome’s presence in the peninsula in that period.
2. Caesarmagnus presents position: The Spanish tribes were rebellious due to Viriathus.
3. Caesarmagnu states that: The tribes were rebellious, and to attribute that to Viriathus is silly.
4. Therefore Tulius position is incorrect.

See the similarities?

On logic, case 2, with the sentence:

“He joined an existing rebellion, and after he was gone that existing rebellion continued for a long time on and off, as it had before.”

Quite similar in logic terms with the sentence in your previous post:

“The Spanish tribes, including the Lusitanians, were resisting Rome before Viriathus and I'm sure they'd have continued to do so even if he'd never existed, as they continued to for centuries irrespective of anything he did.”

I had already answerd to you with this sentence:

“The Lusitanians also breath oxygen before Viriathus and continued to breath oxygen after Viriathus death, irrespective of anything he did.”

These three sentences have the same reasoning flaw. Here is a constructed example using much of your wording, just changing the first statement:

“The Romans conquered territory before Julius Caesar and I'm sure they'd have continued to do so even if he'd never existed, as they continued to for centuries irrespective of anything he did.”

See the equal construction?

These constructions are made in an attempt to minimize any action taken by any character, underlining the structural elements in their societies and minimize the short term events.

Don’t know the name of this reasoning, if there is one. So if someone knows maybe can help me here.

On the post and not directly logic errors, you mention the “Spanish tribes” has the populi in the Iberian Peninsula were an homogeneous group. Well they weren’t. On the contrary they were quite heterogeneous. We have Celtics, we have Iberians, we have groups that share characteristics of both, the Celtiberians, we have Indo-Europeans pre-Celtic (the Lusitanian and the Vettones), we have the Turdetani, we have the Vascones (that were also in Gaul, the Aquitani), etc. Caesar divided Gaul in three parts, that can’t be so easily done in the Iberian Peninsula.

Than you state that they were rebellious. Well… some were, others weren’t. To be “rebellious” also implies that they were under the domain of something, in this case the Rome. In this line we can’t say that the Lusitanian were rebellious since most of the conflicts they fought against Rome was to avoid being under their domain. It is more correct to call them “bellicose”.

Than you also stated that the “Spanish tribes” “weren't conclusively finished off until the time of Augustus well over 100 years later”, well, yes, I already had stated that in the previous post, but that isn’t related with the Lusitanians. That was in other region of the Peninsula as the designation “Cantabrian Wars” implies. Unlike the “Lusitanian Wars” that spread to regions outside Lusitania, and had strong consequences in the Celtiberia and Turdetania, and had conections with the Celtiberian Wars, the “Cantabrian Wars” were much more located in… Cantabria.

A final note, I already understood that you find “Viriathus” “overrated”, and since we are in a Forum you have all the right to make such a claim, yet I still didn’t understood, and you still didn’t stated who rated him and how. And what is a relevant historical character.

I don’t recall who was the historian that said that during millenniums thousands or millions of people crossed the Rubicon, but today we solely talk about Caesar’s cross.

Indeed so and I think even Augustus got impacient and left it to the generals (cant remember who).

Funny how in hindsight we always look on people who brought death and destruction to their peoples as heroes. But I suppose we've never heard of the many leaders who did the sensible thing?

And I still don't agree it was anything to do with the history of Portugal, which only formed 1000 years later. Unless you are talking about the history of the 'space'!
It was Agrippa if I recall correctly.

The Lusitanians and the character Viriathus have to do with the History of Portugal and Spain in the sense that you are pointing. It is the history of the territory, the Iberian Peninsula, before the formation of the political entities that we know today, Portugal and Spain.

While taking my degree I had disciplines such as “Pre-History of Portugal”, “Proto-History of Portugal”, “Roman Portugal”, etc… and here “Portugal” must be understood has the present day territory, and not the Political entity with several sizes along its history.

…but they were right to stick with it until they civilized the place…
The ”place”, the Iberian Peninsula, was already civilized before the arrival of the Romans. The Romans just brought new civilizational aspects. And I state this according to the generalized concept: “A civilization or civilisation (see English spelling differences) is any complex society characterized by urban development, social stratification imposed by a cultural elite, symbolic systems of communication (for example, writing systems), and a perceived separation from and domination over the natural environment.”

Source: Civilization - Wikipedia
 
  • Like
Reactions: Openminded

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,000
Portugal
And the Luitanians were more successful with him as their leader then ever before or since.
That is correct, or at the least is what the sources state. There were somewhat similar successes with Sertorius against his Roman enemy faction. Vut that was a diferente fight. The problem (for the Lusitanians) was that Sertorius’ actions contributed to their Romanization (read here pacification, acceptance of the Roman culture and Rome’s control of the territory).
 

LatinoEuropa

Ad Honorem
Oct 2015
5,222
Matosinhos Portugal
Indeed so and I think even Augustus got impacient and left it to the generals (cant remember who).

Funny how in hindsight we always look on people who brought death and destruction to their peoples as heroes. But I suppose we've never heard of the many leaders who did the sensible thing?

And I still don't agree it was anything to do with the history of Portugal, which only formed 1000 years later. Unless you are talking about the history of the 'space'!
--------------------------------

And I still don't agree it was anything to do with the history of Portugal, which only formed 1000 years later. Unless you are talking about the history of the 'space'!
...

Yes more correct to say that has to do with the history of the Iberian Peninsula. She is rich in history.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
6,678
Spain
Viriato didn´t live in Iberian Peninsula... if Spain didn´t exist in those time... Iberian Peninsula still less.... in those days existed HISPANIA...and Viriathus lived in HISPANIA....so....if we say Viriathus didn´t live in Spain... I hope everybody say Vercingetorix didn´t live in France... and Wolgang von Goethe didn´t live in Germany...he lived in the Holy Roman Empire and he died in the Kingdom of Prussia...
But I don´t accept manipulation, double standar, and privilieges....and not. not, GERMANS didn´t defeat Romans in Tauteburg....because it doesn´t exist any Germany, any German State... etc etc etc... Viriato lifed in HISPANIA (Lusitania that was a Spanish province, or HISPANII province was created in the year 27 BC.. many time later Viriato´s dead)

Amilcar Guerra the Scholar from University of Lisboa says very clear... Viriato was not portuguese as Lusitania was not Portugal... Lusitania was an area into HISPANIA, a territory that included a large part of modern Portugal and Western Spain... from areas in modern MADRID, Toledo, Ciudad Real, Huelva, Sevilla, Cáceres, Badajoz, Salamanca, Córdoba etc etc

As Amilcar Guerra writes: It is not necessary to claim a Portuguese or Spanish origin to Viriato, it was a "Lusitanian, of a territory that encompassed areas on both sides of the current border " ... In fact, Almicar Guerra still is going more.. he thinks Virato was never "Lusitanian" and he likely never saw to himself as "Lusitanian"....

We can listen this intelligent portuguese scholar: Firstly, it is not possible to know if Viriato born in the "Lusitania" today belongs to Portugal or in the "Lusitania" today belongs to Spain. Second, I doubt Viriato saw himself as a "Lusitanian"....since it was a term created by the Romans themselves that "reveals a difficulty in identifying local populations" ... therefore it is a concept of a reality far removed from those individuals ... who never called themselves Lusitanians. ..

Amilcar Guerra think the Portuguese Nationalism (late 19th Century but mostly in 20th Century) appropriated the history of Viriato and the Lusitanians ... while the Spaniards did not give it much importance (except perhaps in Zamora and Salamanca). Camoens, Quevedo, Pessoa wrote poems to him...

We only can say about Viriato is that he was a great Guerrillero lived and died in what romans named HISPANIA (Word is not Latin, by the way and whose root is SPAN) and between the tribes settled in Hispania...he lived in a human group Romans named Lusitanians...

Nothing more it is possible to say.


 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,000
Portugal
Viriato didn´t live in Iberian Peninsula... if Spain didn´t exist in those time... Iberian Peninsula still less.... in those days existed HISPANIA...and Viriathus lived in HISPANIA....so....if we say Viriathus didn´t live in Spain... I hope everybody say Vercingetorix didn´t live in France... and Wolgang von Goethe didn´t live in Germany...he lived in the Holy Roman Empire and he died in the Kingdom of Prussia...

But I don´t accept manipulation, double standar, and privilieges....and not. not, GERMANS didn´t defeat Romans in Tauteburg....because it doesn´t exist any Germany, any German State... etc etc etc... Viriato lifed in HISPANIA (Lusitania that was a Spanish province, or HISPANII province was created in the year 27 BC.. many time later Viriato´s dead)

Amilcar Guerra the Scholar from University of Lisboa says very clear... Viriato was not portuguese as Lusitania was not Portugal... Lusitania was an area into HISPANIA, a territory that included a large part of modern Portugal and Western Spain... from areas in modern MADRID, Toledo, Ciudad Real, Huelva, Sevilla, Cáceres, Badajoz, Salamanca, Córdoba etc etc

As Amilcar Guerra writes: It is not necessary to claim a Portuguese or Spanish origin to Viriato, it was a "Lusitanian, of a territory that encompassed areas on both sides of the current border " ... In fact, Almicar Guerra still is going more.. he thinks Virato was never "Lusitanian" and he likely never saw to himself as "Lusitanian"....

We can listen this intelligent portuguese scholar: Firstly, it is not possible to know if Viriato born in the "Lusitania" today belongs to Portugal or in the "Lusitania" today belongs to Spain. Second, I doubt Viriato saw himself as a "Lusitanian"....since it was a term created by the Romans themselves that "reveals a difficulty in identifying local populations" ... therefore it is a concept of a reality far removed from those individuals ... who never called themselves Lusitanians. ..

Amilcar Guerra think the Portuguese Nationalism (late 19th Century but mostly in 20th Century) appropriated the history of Viriato and the Lusitanians ... while the Spaniards did not give it much importance (except perhaps in Zamora and Salamanca). Camoens, Quevedo, Pessoa wrote poems to him...

We only can say about Viriato is that he was a great Guerrillero lived and died in what romans named HISPANIA (Word is not Latin, by the way and whose root is SPAN) and between the tribes settled in Hispania...he lived in a human group Romans named Lusitanians...

Nothing more it is possible to say.
I quite agree with Amílcar Guerra about Viriato and the problems of nationalism here. I mentioned it on post #11: “In the 19th century Viriathus was raised to the status of Portuguese national hero, and that status was heavily underlined during the Portuguese dictatorship of the Estado Novo, so his references in the Portuguese historiography are plenty. But most of my comments will be based on the biography “Viriato” by the Spanish professor Mauricio Pastor Muñoz of the University of Granada, mostly by practical reasons.”

I don’t agree with you when you state that the Iberian Peninsula didn’t exist at the time. And you know that. The concept didn’t existed as today. But its physical characteristics did, for millenniums. And the Iberians, named by the Greeks, were populi in the south and East of the peninsula. So “Iberian Peninsula” is a geographical concept that we can use today to communicate. We can also use the word “Hispania”, albeit can be more restricted, at the time the Romans had two, Ulterior and Citeror, that didn’t occupy all the peninsula. The word “Spain” although not incorrect is today misleading, due the existence today of a state that doesn’t occupy the same borders of the peninsula, and since the Lusitanians, as you say that Amílcar Guerra states, occupied both sides of the current political borders.

I also don’t agree with you when you say that “Hispania” is not a Latin word. It is a Latin word even if has a foreign origin. For instance today the word “internet” is a Portuguese word, even if it came from the English. Languages change in time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: martin76

LatinoEuropa

Ad Honorem
Oct 2015
5,222
Matosinhos Portugal
I can not believe what I'm reading.

Always the same music.

Luis Vaz de Camões was the greatest poet in Portugal

Amílcar Guerra, is a teacher


It is incredible to say that the name Hispania is older than the name Iberian Peninsula.

All that is needed is to write in history the Romans arrived in Hispania???


------------------------------------------------

Caro amigo martin 76 o nacionalimo português não é similar ao nacionalismo Espanha Castela. E voçê tem que admitir que Portugal é uma Nação desde 1249 e a Espanha é uma nação desde 1492 no meu país se fala duas linguas 20 mil habitantes falam a lingua Mirandês e mais de 10 milhões falam a lingua portuguêsa.
O contrário de Espanha que falam varias lingua Catalunha falam a lingua Catalã 8 milhões Galiza falam o galego 3 milhões País Basco falam a lingua basca população 2.2 dois milhões e duzentos mil . Muitos destes cidadões não sabem falar a lingua Castelhana: O seu país que eu respeito muito é uma união de países com várias linguas,similar á Suiça Bélgica Inglaterra etc.A Lusitânia é o território de Portugal e uma parte de território de Espanha.

Eu não compreendo o amigo,quando eu falo de história voçê sempre ataca com a palavra do nacionalismo,eu sei porquê,porque Castela nunca conseguiu conquistar Portugal. Um recado para a Espanha Castela por favor quando pedirem o território Gibraltar á Inglaterra por favor não se esqueçam de entregar o território Olivença a Portugal como entregar Ceuta e outros territórios a Marrocos . O que eu estou de acordo com martin76 sim somos todos um pôvo Ibérico não esquecendo da raça portuguêsa que tem ADN diferente do espanhol. Comprimentos amigo passe um bom dia.

-----------------

Em idioma espanhol - Spain

Estimado amigo martin 76, el nacionalimo portugués no se parece al nacionalismo castellano castellano. Y debe admitir que Portugal es una nación desde 1249 y que España es una nación desde 1492 en mi país si se hablan dos idiomas. 20 mil habitantes hablan el idioma mirandés y más de 10 millones hablan el idioma portugués.
En el lado opuesto de España que hablan varios idiomas, se habla catalán, se habla catalán, 8 millones de gallegas se hablan gallego, 3 millones de países vascos, y se habla en vasco, 2.2 millones y doscientos mil. Muchos de estos ciudadanos no saben hablar el idioma español: su país que respeto mucho es una unión de países con varios idiomas, similar a Suiza, Bélgica, Inglaterra, etc. Lusitânia es el territorio de Portugal y una parte del territorio de España.

No entiendo al amigo, cuando hablo de historia siempre atacas con la palabra del nacionalismo, sé por qué, porque Castilla nunca logró conquistar Portugal. Un mensaje para España Castilla, por favor cuando solicite el territorio de Gibraltar a Inglaterra, no se olvide de entregar el territorio de Olivença a Portugal como la entrega de Ceuta y otros territorios a Marruecos. Con lo que estoy de acuerdo con martin76 sí, todos somos un poema ibérico que no se olvida de la raza portuguesa que tiene un ADN diferente al español Las duraciones de los amigos pasan un buen día.

.....................

Dear friend martin 76 the Portuguese nationalimo is not similar to the nationalism Spain Castile. And you have to admit that Portugal is a nation since 1249 and Spain is a nation since 1492 in my country if two languages are spoken 20 thousand inhabitants speak the language Mirandese and more than 10 million speak the Portuguese language.
The opposite of Spain that speak several lingua Catalunya speak the Catalan language 8 million Galicia speak Galician 3 million Basque Country speak the Basque language population 2.2 two million and two hundred thousand. Many of these citizens do not know how to speak the Spanish language: Their country that I respect a lot is a union of countries with several languages, similar to Switzerland Belgium England etc. Lusitânia is the territory of Portugal and a part of territory of Spain.

I do not understand the friend, when I speak of history you always attack with the word of nationalism, I know why, because Castile never managed to conquer Portugal. A message for Spain Castile please when requesting the territory Gibraltar to England please do not forget to hand over Olivença territory to Portugal as delivering Ceuta and other territories to Morocco. What I agree with martin76 yes we are all an Iberian poem not forgetting the Portuguese race that has DNA other than Spanish. Friend lengths pass a good day.
 

Caesarmagnus

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,637
Australia
Not seeing much point replying to that text wall above. I already explained why I don't think Viriathus was particularly important in the scheme of things. It's in my first post, and several others after it. Nothing new up there.
 

LatinoEuropa

Ad Honorem
Oct 2015
5,222
Matosinhos Portugal
You can apply the battle of words between me and Martin 76

Portugal and Spain - I like to talk more about Viriato.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
6,678
Spain
I quite agree with Amílcar Guerra about Viriato and the problems of nationalism here. I mentioned it on post #11: “In the 19th century Viriathus was raised to the status of Portuguese national hero, and that status was heavily underlined during the Portuguese dictatorship of the Estado Novo, so his references in the Portuguese historiography are plenty. But most of my comments will be based on the biography “Viriato” by the Spanish professor Mauricio Pastor Muñoz of the University of Granada, mostly by practical reasons.”

I don’t agree with you when you state that the Iberian Peninsula didn’t exist at the time. And you know that. The concept didn’t existed as today. But its physical characteristics did, for millenniums. And the Iberians, named by the Greeks, were populi in the south and East of the peninsula. So “Iberian Peninsula” is a geographical concept that we can use today to communicate. We can also use the word “Hispania”, albeit can be more restricted, at the time the Romans had two, Ulterior and Citeror, that didn’t occupy all the peninsula. The word “Spain” although not incorrect is today misleading, due the existence today of a state that doesn’t occupy the same borders of the peninsula, and since the Lusitanians, as you say that Amílcar Guerra states, occupied both sides of the current political borders.

I also don’t agree with you when you say that “Hispania” is not a Latin word. It is a Latin word even if has a foreign origin. For instance today the word “internet” is a Portuguese word, even if it came from the English. Languages change in time.
However dear Tulius.. I agree with you in everything... When I told about Iberian Peninsula was as a concept (You have intuited very well from the first moment).. as you well know (and you well said).. nobody nor in 2nd Century BC... nor in 1400 nor in 1789 spoke about "Iberian Peninsula"... and never Greek named IBERIA to the Peninsula.

Althought you know.. I put this link (Spanish) about concept of IBERIA for Greeks according with greek and Latin sources. It is funny.. for Greeks Iberia was southern France (what today is the Rousillon) and the Spanish Mediterranean Coast and some areas in Andalusia and Portugal.... but not Castilla-Cantabria-Galecia-Most of Portugal-Asturia etc etc...
In fact, the Greek concept of IBERIA is smaller than the Latin concept of HISPANIA. And not all the lands in Peninsula were Iberia and not all Iberia was in Peninsula (and I am not talking about Caucasian Iberia but about modern Southern France). Nor Oporto, nor Lisboa nor Santiago de Compostela nor Oviedo nor Madrid, nor Soria etc were "IBERIA".. but yes Montpellier, Perpignan, Narbonne, etc.

Latin authors never used IBERIA.... because this concept did not emcompass the whole of Peninsula.. they used HISPANIA.. many people think both are the same meaning... both you as me (and others members in this forum) know they are not synonyms.... IBERIA for Greeks is not the same meaning that HISPANIA for Romans.

In any case, both we agree Iberian Peninsula was not a concept in Viriatho time! May be.. and only may be he heart a word about Hispania.. but I am not sure...

And you are rigth.. HISPANIA is a latin word although the roots don´t come from Latin word.

an objective historical description of Viriato would be:


Viriato was a shepherd bravely and brilliantly fought Romans in an area Romans will call Lusitania.