![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Abstract
The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212) is widely regarded as a decisive moment in Christian Spain's “re-conquest” of Al-Andalus. But when did the story of that battle assume its central place in the conventional history of theReconquista and of Castile more broadly? Only a short time after Las Navas, theChronica latina regum Castellae (Latin Chronicle of the Kings of Castile) capitalized on the propagandistic potential of the battle, using a retelling of the Christian victory to legitimate Castilian royal authority and promote the idea of Castile's dominance on the Iberian Peninsula. TheChronica latina's account of Las Navas served immediate political ends while also setting the tone for later histories.
Notes
1. Bearing in mind the rise of Marinid involvement in Peninsular affairs and the resilience of Muslim Granada, other medievalists take a less deterministic view of the battle's long-term consequences. J. N. Hillgarth, for example, writes that Las Navas “was not decisive in itself but the Almohads failed to recover from the blow” (1: 17). Francisco García Fitz not only takes a skeptical view of the battle's impact but also denies the very possibility of a “decisive victory” over the Almohads: “Una derrota única y definitiva del Islam peninsular, una batalla decisiva, estaba fuera de su [los dirigentes castellano-leoneses] alcance” (409). Peter Linehan allows that, “Within Spain the effect [of Las Navas] was to shift the peninsular balance decisively over the next three decades by delivering the greater part of Andalucía to Castile” (History 318). Jonathan Ray has discussed the effects of Las Navas on the shifting frontier between the Peninsula's Christian-controlled North and Muslim-dominated South, drawing particular attention to resulting changes in relations between Muslims, Christians, and Jews (1-14).
2. Representing this view, Américo Castro writes that “the victory at Las Navas de Tolosa (1212) established forever the superiority of the Christians,” and he calls the battle “decisive” with epithetical regularity (483; 18; et passim). Henry Kamen uses Las Navas to frame the later Middle Ages in his study of the Spanish Inquisition, mentioning the battle within a paragraph of the accession of the Catholic Monarchs, which occurred over 260 years later (2–3).
3. Alfonso X reiterates this assessment of Las Navas elsewhere in the Estoria: “…et fueron alli los moros quebrantados et aterrados, de guisa que nunqua despues alçaron cabesça, nin la alçaran, si Dios quisiere” (693; ch. 1013). The Estoria, like the Chronica latina before it, is fluent in Almohad affairs, with regard to both the circumstances of the regime prior to Las Navas and the succession crisis that followed the battle (658–59; ch. 979). Compare Chronica latina, 39–40 ch. 6; 87–88 ch. 45; 92–93 ch. 49; 97–98 ch. 53. I have consulted the edition of Alfonso X's Estoria undertaken by Ramón Menéndez Pidal, which is cited in the bibliography as Primera Crónica General, and I have consulted Luis Charlo Brea's 1997 edition of the Chronica latina. All translations are my own.
4. Fernando III's mother, Berenguela of Castile, seems to have arranged for Juan de Soria to be made chancellor when she abdicated the Castilian throne in favor of her son (Serrano 4–5). On Juan's biography, as well as the authorship and dating of the Chronica latina, see Lomax, “Authorship,” 205–11; Chron. lat., 9–31; O’Callaghan, Latin Chronicle xxviii–xxxvii; and Linehan, “Juan de Soria.”
5. Juan was so utterly indispensable to the workings of Fernando's court that in 1237, the king wrote to Gregory IX asking the pope to reverse the bishop's translation from the see of Osma to the see of León. The request was honored by the pope, but it is curious that Fernando wrote at all given that Juan probably would have remained with him at court in his administrative capacity a majority of the time, regardless of which diocese he was attached to (Linehan, Spanish Church 108–09).
6. When he feels the emphasis is warranted Juan highlights specific documents to reinforce his version of events, as in the case of a charter held at the Burgos cathedral which demonstrates that it had been the desire of Alfonso VIII that his daughter Berenguela succeed him in the event that the throne is left unoccupied: “Declarabatur insuper quod hec fuisset uoluntas gloriosi regis per quondam cartam, sigilo suo plumbeo munitam, que facta fuerat in curia apud Carrionem celebrate, que reperta fuit in armario Burgensis ecclesie” (Chron. lat. 76; ch. 33).
7. On the implications of Alfonso's imperial coronation for subsequent investiture rituals in Castile, see Linehan, History, 235–37.
8. On the possible implications such shifts in tense hold for ascertaining when given sections of the chronicle might have been composed, see Inés Fernández Ordóñez, par. 12–14.
9. The Chronica latina begins very much in medias res, forgoing an introduction or an assessment of the Visigothic period. I am inclined to share O’Callaghan's suspicion that the text originally contained some form of introductory passage, now lost (Latin Chronicle xxviii).
10. Juan de Soria comments briefly on the theological divergences between the Almoravids and the Almohads, noting that the name of the latter signifies that they are “Unitarians, because they pledge themselves to one God,” in accordance with the writings of Ibn Tûmart [Nominati sunt autem illi sic qui obtinuerunt regnum predictum Almohades, hoc est Vnientes, quia scilicet unum deum se colere fatebantur, quem predicauit Auen Tummert, sicut in libello quodam, quem ipse composuit manifeste declaratur] (Chron. lat. 40; ch. 6). Alfonso X's Estoria de España would later discuss the political transition and shifts in religious practice that the Almohads’ rise signaled in the Maghreb, as well as the etymology of their movement's name: “…almohades en el castellano tanto quiere dezir como ‘ayuntados’” (659; ch. 979). On the writings of Ibn Tûmart and the transition from Almoravid to Almohad rule, see Viguera Molíns, 205–11.
11. There had to be an explanation for the Alarcos defeat that went beyond arrogance and poor planning. By the end of the thirteenth century, the (likely spurious) tale of an affair Alfonso had with “a Jewess of Toledo”—which is supposed to have led to his defeat in the battle—had become a watchword against the dangers of granting Jews access to the citadels of political and fiscal power (Nirenberg 15–41).
12. The shepherd miracle would be retold in several later histories, including the Estoria de España, ch. 1016, 698.
13. Berenguela's union with Alfonso IX was dissolved on grounds of consanguinity, but not before it yielded five children (Shadis 68–71). Their son Fernando became king of Castile in 1217, and he acceded to the Leonese throne upon the death of his father, in 1230 (Chron. lat. ch. 61).
14. Juan de Soria praises Berenguela for recognizing the distinct possibility that Alfonso IX might try to claim the Castilian throne, noting that had the queen not acted to install Fernando as king, “the Castilians perhaps would not have their own king today” [Vere quidem utilis fuit simulatio Castellanis, nam nisi tam prudenter processum fuisset, forsitam hodie regem propium non haberent] (Chron. lat. 77; ch. 33). Indeed, Berenguela's perspicacity had created the circumstances for the eventual reunification of Castile and León, and so her impact on Peninsular politics can be seen to have been considerable.
15. The Chronica latina likewise describes Alfonso's refusal to plunder: “Omnia mobilia que preciosa fuerunt inuenta data fuerunt regi Aragonum et illis, que venerant cum ipso ad bellum” (63; ch. 25).
16. The letter likely was written in the late summer of 1212, as Innocent's response to Alfonso is dated October 26 of that year (Smith, “Papacy” 158).
17. There is a distinct possibility that Rodrigo consulted Juan's chronicle when he composed his own, which became one of the chief sources for Alfonso X's Estoria. There is no evidence, however, that Alfonso's scriptorium consulted the Chronica latina directly. See Linehan, “Juan de Soria.”