[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review]
In 2017, Alex Mullen launched the ERC project LatinNow. Its goal is to study Latinization, literacy, and bi- and multilingualism within the broader context of Late Antique social developments. The project led to three important open access publications: Mullen 2023, Mullen/Willi 2024, and the present volume under review, that Mullen, co–edited with her colleague, historian George Woudhuysen. The aim of this work is to lay the foundations for a study of the history of linguistic communication within its historical and cultural context, specifically in the western provinces of the Roman Empire during the Late and Post-Imperial periods, from the 5th to the 6th centuries. The volume originated in 2018 during a seminar at All Souls College, Oxford, organized by Mullen, Woudhuysen, and Paul Russell.
The volume consists of eight contributions tracing the history of linguistic communication across the Praefectura Galliae, North Africa, the Iberian Peninsula, Gaul, the Belgicae, the Germaniae, Ireland, and Britannia. with a final review by Russell that is, in our opinion, excessively critical. Despite its flaws, we commend the editors and authors for their boldness in embarking on such an original endeavor.
The introduction by Mullen and Woudhuysen presents the subject and highlights the challenges that make its treatment particularly difficult. These issues include the scientific paradigms in Late Antiquity and Early Medieval history studies that marginalize linguistic approaches, such as Indo-European linguistics (which can be overly technical and influenced by national socialist ideology) and sociolinguistics. They also highlight challenges posed by differing approaches employed when scholars seek linguistic and sociolinguistic information on Merovingian Latin itself and when they are interested more in the relationship between Latin and Proto-French (8–9). They also point to the unreliability of sources, such as when the MGH edition of the works of Gregory of Tours, reflects more Bruno Krusch’s view of Merovingian Latin as “bad Latin” than the actual Latin used by the bishop of Tours (19–20)[1].
The first two challenges appear highly problematic. A historian of the Late Antique and Post-Imperial periods hardly requires in-depth knowledge of Indo-European linguistics for their research. Moreover, the field of sociolinguistics has already yielded impressive results for these periods, as I will show below. The second challenge concerns the differing approaches between historians and (socio)linguists, which have reduced the Merovingian domain to a vast linguistic wasteland, but this is not the case given the abundance of research dedicated to the linguistic and sociolinguistic aspects of the Merovingian era.[2] The concern over the reliability of sources is valid, however, and it would be prudent to work on scholarly editions of Late Antique and Early Medieval texts[3].
Chapter Two, by J. Conant explores the linguistic history of North Africa, specifically the Tingitana and the Dioecesis Africa. This ecosystem comprised indigenous Berber languages that existed alongside exogenous ones, such as Punic, Latin, and eventually evolved into Romance, Vandal, Greek, and Arabic. Berber languages dominated rural areas (56), while Latin, a symbol of power, administration, and culture, prevailed in cities among the ruling elite (39–40). Latin also appeared in rural Tunisia, eastern Algeria, western Libya and among working classes in some urban centers. During Byzantine rule in the 6th and 7th c., Latin faced competition from Greek, though Greek never succeeded in establishing itself. Multilingualism, with Latin as a lingua franca, enabled communication between different linguistic communities.
Conant provides a detailed account of African multilingualism that persisted until the Arab conquest in the 7th and 8th centuries, as well as an intriguing commentary on African Latin literature. The piece, however, fails to provide a linguistic overview of the evolution of the various languages, particularly African Latin, except for a footnote referencing relevant research[4].
Chapters three and four focus on the languages of the Iberian Peninsula. In her excellent overview of the external and internal history of languages in Visigothic Spain (6th—7th c.), Isabel Velázquez uses a wide range of sources, including epigraphic evidence (Visigothic slates), literary works (Isidore of Seville), and legal texts (Lex Visigothorum).
Visigothic had virtually disappeared by the 6th—7th c., and Latin, now the native language of most of the population, served as a means of horizontal and vertical communication (60). Although there were differences between the rough Latin spoken by the rustici and the refined language of educated urbanites adhering to classical norms, mutual intelligibility was still maintained (83–84).
Graham Barrett examines the evolution of language use on the peninsula from the 5th to the 10th century. The era is marked by the dominance of Latin, while other languages, Germanic, Greek, and Hebrew, played a secondary role. Latin, regardless of the register used, is characterized by its conservatism (103–104) and, in higher registers, a certain fondness for obscurity. In vertical communication, mutual understanding was ensured by the brevitas of expression and the sermo humilis, a form of plain Latin accessible to the uneducated (101).
In the post-Visigothic period, linguistic dynamics in the Iberian Peninsula diverged significantly. In the south, under Arab rule, Latin usage declined (113) despite a period of Arabic-Latin bilingualism. Meanwhile, in the north, various texts, often in conservative Latin, began to proliferate (107–109). This Latin was adapted by notarii and lectores to accommodate the diverse geographic and social needs of the population (113–115). Additionally, old forms of Latin persisted in legal, administrative, biblical, and liturgical contexts, maintaining continuity with the language of the imperial era.
These two excellent contributions would have benefited from being integrated into a single text, thereby avoiding repetition.
Chapters five to seven focus on the Gallic regions, the two Belgicae, and the two Germaniae. Alderik Henk Blom undertook the ardous task of examining the Gaulish language[5]. After providing an overview of the history of Gaul during the Late Antique and Early Medieval periods, followed by a meticulous and critical presentation of the sources, the author outlines the history of Latin-Gaulish bilingualism, which culminated in the complete Romanization of the region (149–150).
By the mid-2nd c., Gaulish elites replaced written Gaulish with Latin (136–137). Spoken Gaulish gradually disappeared from the cities, retreating to rural areas where it persisted until the 4th c. In some remote regions, it survived until the 5th c. (149–150).
Ian Wood examined the evolution of Latin during the Merovingian period (5th to 8th centuries). During this time, the written form of Latin diverged from classical norms due to the disappearance of schools (155–156). From the 5th to the early 6th c., written Latin was characterized by the ornate style of Sidonius Apollinaris, bishop of Clermont (*430—†489), practiced by a cultured Gallo-Roman elite. However, even at this time, other writers, such as Caesarius of Arles (c. *470—†542), resorted to the sermo humilis, which, while grammatically correct, was simpler and better suited for a popular audience.
The 6th c. is dominated by the figure of Gregory of Tours (*c. 539—†594). The historian of the Merovingians not only adopted the sermo humilis or rusticus but also produced a Latin that became increasingly uncertain, often stumbling into errors. In the 7th c., learned figures like Desiderius, Bishop of Cahors (c. 590–655), attempted to emulate the conservative language and pompous style of Sidonius, with limited success. In essence, Wood provides a history of literary Latin in Merovingian Gaul, neglecting both the sermo cotidianus and the internal and external linguistic history. This choice is debatable, as the studies in these two areas are numerous and of high quality. Moreover, the author explores the history of literary Latin in southern Gaul, which was heavily Romanized. The picture would have been different had he also considered the less Romanized north, already strongly influenced by the Frankish presence[6].
Wolfgang Haubrichs treated the persistence and gradual replacement of Latin and Gallo-Romance by Frankish in the regions of the two Belgicae and the two Germaniae (197). Basing his conclusions on a meticulous linguistic analysis of onomastic and epigraphic evidence from the western Rhineland, he identified a number of key developments. First, in the northern Rhineland, integration into the Germanic-Frankish sphere occurred between the 7th and 8th c., while the central Rhineland experienced an early and intense process of Germanization. While urban centers retained some Latin epigraphic culture until the 8th c., suggesting a bi-ethnic Romano-Frankish elite, rural toponyms indicate the presence of a Latin-Roman population during the Merovingian period, likely from western territories. In the Mosella Romana, between Remich and Koblenz, a Latin-Roman culture persisted up until the 10th c., supported by the influence of Augusta Treverorum (197–199).
Chapter eight is team-written by David Stifter, Nora White, and Katherine Forsyth. This chapter traces the development of Irish Celtic and explores its interplay with Latin and British Celtic (203). They emphasize that the linguistic history of Ireland was less affected by successive invasions (211) and differs fundamentally from that of Britain, which was first occupied by the Romans and later by the Anglo-Saxons (207). Although the influence of Latin emerged in the 4th c. with Christianization, Latin was confined to the realm of religious rituals, never became part of daily communication, and was a prestigious foreign language taught in monastic schools. Its cultural influence became more significant as Latin facilitated the creation of an indigenous alphabetic system, Ogham[7], which spurred the development of Irish epigraphy. Additionally, Latin-speaking/writing Christianity fostered the emergence of an indigenous medieval Latin literature and a prolific output of medieval manuscripts. Literature in the Irish language would develop from the 7th c. onwards. One can only regret that this excellent overview of such a unique linguistic landscape does not provide further insights into the specific characteristics of the Latin used in Ireland[8].
David N. Parsons explores the persistence of Latinity in Insular Britain from the 4th to the 6th century. The complexity of this task arises from the coexistence of three languages: the Celtic dialects of the indigenous populations, Latin introduced to the island by Romans in 55 BCE, and Anglo-Saxon brought by the Germanic settlers in the early 5th century. Additionally, sources are often highly fragmentary.
Evidence, including literature and inscriptions from western Britain (Cornwall, Wales, and Cumbria), indicates that Latin remained well established as a liturgical language and a medium of the social elite throughout the 5th and 6th c., alongside Celtic dialects (239–247). For the Lowlands, encompassing southern and eastern England, we can only offer hypotheses. According to Parsons, this region was more Romanized than the west and a form of Latin similar to that of Gaul might have survived into the 5th c. before being entirely supplanted by the Germanic languages of the invaders (267).
A critical postscript by Russell concludes the study. He first observes that one of the primary aims set by the editors—namely, a history of linguistic communication in the post-imperial and early medieval periods, grounded in collaboration between historians and linguists—was not fully achieved. He rightly criticizes Wood’s contribution on Late Antique Gaul in this context. However, there are some questionable remarks regarding the lack of studies on Late Antique and Early Medieval Latin (272). Adams has addressed this topic in many of his publications, and there are also numerous studies on Merovingian Latin. As for Medieval Latin, Peter Stotz’s comprehensive work is now available as a key resource. I agree with some of Russell’s criticisms. It is evident that collaboration between historians and linguists was, at best, laborious. The contributions on Spain, although excellent chapters, totally fail to engage with one another (269–270). That said, these issues are primarily technical and organizational in nature, requiring adjustments to methodology rather than questioning the originality of the project and the quality of the contributions. Russell’s critique is overly negative in its general orientation.
The volume ends with a rich bibliography and three indexes that facilitate consultation.
Mullen and Woudhuysen deserve credit for leading an innovative research project focused on the history of linguistic communication, in Latin and other languages, within the Roman Empire during the pivotal transition from Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages. The new linguistic structures emerging at that moment continue to underpin linguistic communication in the 21st century
I hope that this commendable initiative will continue and allow the researchers to extend their study further to the east where Latin and Greek, ancient Europe’s most prominent ancient languages, intersect[9].
Authors and Titles
- Language and History in the Late-Roman and Post-Imperial West (Alex Mullen and George Woudhuysen)
North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula
- Languages and Communities in Late Antique and Early Medieval North Africa (Jonathan P. Conant)
- Reflections on the Latin Language Spoken and Written in Visigothic Hispania (Isabel Velázquez)
- Conservatism in Language: Framing Latin in Late Antique and Early Medieval Iberia (Graham Barrett)
Gaul and the Germanies
- Gaulish in the Late Empire (c. 200-600 ce) (Alderik H. Blom)
- Registers of Latin in Gaul from the Fifth to the Seventh Century (Ian Wood)
- Death and Survival of Latin in the Empire West of the Rhine (Belgicae, Germaniae) and the Rise of the Frankish-Theodisc Languages (Wolfgang Haubrichs)
Ireland and Britain
- Early Literacy and Multilingualism in Ireland and Britain (David Stifter and Nora White)
- The Romance of Early Britain: Latin, British, and English, c. 400-600 (David N. Parsons)
- A Critical Afterword (Paul Russell)
Bibliography
Adamik, Bela. 2020 a. Transformation of the case system in African Latin as evidenced in inscriptions. Acta Classica Universitatis Scientiarum Debreceniensis 55, 13–6.
—. 2020 b. Transformation of the Vowel System in African Latin with a focus on vowel mergers as evidenced in inscriptions and the problem of the dialectal positioning of Roman Africa. Acta Classica Universitatis Scientiarum Debreceniensis 56, 9–25.
Adams, James N. 2007. The Regional Diversification of Latin 200 BC – AD 600. Cambridge: CUP.
—. 2015. The Latin of the Magerius (Smirat) Mosaic. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 108, 509–544.
—. 2016. An anthology of informal Latin, 200 BC-AD 900 : fifty texts with translations and linguistic commentary. Cambridge: CUP.
Bieler, Ludwig. 1993 (= 1952) Libri epistolarum Sancti Patricii episcopi: introduction, text and commentary. Dublin: Royal Irish Acadamy.
Estarán Tolosa, María José. 2024. Rec. Alex Mullen/George Woudhuysen (eds.): Languages and Communities in the Late-Roman and Post-Imperial Western Provinces. Oxford. In: Plekos 26, 675–685 (URL: https://www.plekos.uni-muenchen.de/2024/r-mullen_woudhuy-sen.pdf).
Mullen, Alex (Ed.). 2023. Social Factors in the Latinization of the Roman West. Oxford: OUP.
Mullen, Alex & Anna Willi (Eds.). 2024. Latinization, Local Languages, and Literacies in the Roman West. Oxford: OUP.
Rochette, Bruno. 1997. Le Latin dans le monde grec: Recherches sur la diffusion de la langue et des lettres latines dans les provinces hellénophones de l’Empire romain. Bruxelles: Latomus.
Stotz, Peter. 2002. Handbuch zur lateinischen Sprache des Mittelalters. 5 Bde. München: C.H. Beck.
Notes
[1] Estaráran 2024, 677–678.
[2] Cf. Estaráran 2024, 677 note 8.
[3] Cf. 275.
[4] Footnote 2 p. 38 ; to Adams 2007, 516-76 cited for Latin Africa, could be added Adams 2015, 2016, 293–306, 354–366, 485–490 and Adamik 2020 a and b.
[5] Cf. p. 154.
[6] Cf. 270.
[7] Estaráran 2024, 682.
[8] Bieler 1993 ; Adams 2016, 444–483.
[9] Rochette 1997.