|
The Battle of Guadalete was fought in 711 or 712 at an unidentified location between the Christian Visigoths of Hispania under their king, Roderic, and an invading force of Muslim Arabs and Berbers under the Berber commander Ṭāriq ibn Ziyad. The battle was significant as the culmination of a series of Berber attacks and the beginning of the Islamic conquest of Hispania. In the battle Roderic probably lost his life, along with many members of the Visigothic nobility, opening the way for the capture of Visigothic capital of Toledo. The battle is sometimes referred to as the Battle of Jerez de la Frontera, Battle of La Janda, Battle of the Río Barbate, or Battle of the Transductine Promontories. ==Sources== The primary source for the battle is the ''Mozarabic Chronicle'', which was written shortly after 754 probably in the vicinity of Toledo.〔Roger Collins (1989), ''The Arab Conquest of Spain, 710–97'' (London: Blackwell Publishing), 26–27, argues for its Toledan provenance, but others have suggested Córdoba or even Syria. A full study of the ''Mozarabic Chronicle'' is given in Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann (1999), "The Textual Transmission of the Mozarabic Chronicle of 754", ''Early Medieval Europe'', 8 (1), 13–29.〕 The Latin ''Chronicle'' was written by a Mozarab Christian. The only other Latin Christian source written within a century of the battle is the ''Historia Langobardorum'' of Paul the Deacon.〔(Paul, VI.xlvi ), only adds the fact that the "Saracens" came to Hispania from Ceuta.〕 Paul was neither Visigothic nor Hispanic, but was writing probably in Montecassino between 787 and 796, where many Visigothic monks had taken refuge. The ''Chronicle'' of 741 is a near-contemporary Hispanic source, but it contains no original material pertaining to the battle. Several later Latin Christian sources contain descriptive accounts of the battle that have sometimes been trusted by historians, most notably the ''Chronicle of Alfonso III'', written by Alfonso III of Asturias in the late ninth century. The high medieval accounts, such as that of Lucas de Tuy, are generally untrustworthy, containing much legend and invention. Besides the Latin Christian sources there are several Arabic language sources widely used by historians, but increasingly coming under heavy criticism.〔In the nineteenth century, Reinhart Dozy compared them to the ''Thousand and One Nights''. More recently, Collins (1989), has compared them to the ''Chanson de Roland'' for French history (p. 34) or the ''Lebor na Cert'' and ''Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh'' for Irish history (p. 5), in terms of historical value.〕 None of them predates the mid-ninth century, the date of the earliest, the ''Futūh Miṣr'' of Ibn ʻAbd al-Ḥakam (''c''.803–71), which was composed in Egypt.〔Charles Cutler Torrey, trans. (1922), ''The History of the Conquest of Egypt, North Africa and Spain: Known as the Futūh Miṣr of Ibn ʻAbd al-Ḥakam'' (Yale University Press); also John Harris Jones, trans. (1858), ''History of the Conquest of Spain'' (Göttingen: W. Fr. Kaestner), pp. 18-22 excerpted at (Ibn Abd-el-Hakem: The Islamic Conquest of Spain ) from Medieval Sourcebook.〕 This account, more rich in detail than the ''Mozarabic Chronicle'', is at odds with not only the later Latin histories, but also the later Arabic ones: the anonymous compilation called the ''Akhbar Majmu'ah'', the late tenth-century work of Ibn al-Qūṭiyya ("the son (descendant ) of the Goth (Wittiza )"), the eleventh-century historian Ibn Hayyān, the thirteenth-century ''Complete History'' of Ibn al-Athir, the fourteenth-century history of Ibn Khaldūn, or the early modern work of al-Maqqarī.〔For an assessment of the value of these sources for the period of the conquest of Gothic Hispania, see Collins (1989), 1–5.〕 The '' Akhbar Majmu'ah'' in particular was upheld by Claudio Sánchez-Albornoz as a genuine eighth-century work surviving only in later copies, but this view has since been refuted.〔Collins (1989), 3.〕 The French Orientalist Évariste Lévi-Provençal on the other hand advocated Ibn Hayyān as the supreme Muslim historian of the era (and the battle).〔Collins (1989), 2 note 3 and 3 note 5 summarises some debate concerning the Arab sources.〕 Among modern Anglo-American historians, Roger Collins, R. A. Fletcher, E. A. Thompson, and Kenneth Baxter Wolf are sceptical of the Arabic sources and rely more on the ''Mozarabic Chronicle''. Historians Thomas F. Glick and Bernard S. Bachrach are less sceptical. Collins in particular rejects a syncretistic approach incorporating information from all the available sources. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Battle of Guadalete」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|