5

During the late 5th and early 6th century AD , there were many Roman officials who defended some parts of the declining Empire, and therefore became rulers of their petty kingdoms and in some cases city states.

For example: Syagrius , who ruled the Kingdom of Soissons, Appolinaris Sidonius , Vicentius, Desiderius , Burdunellus, Peter and Arbogast.

These local rulers established Roman Rump States between the territories of the Germanic Kingdoms in the late 5th and early 6th century AD.

One of these local rulers was Peter , who ruled the city of Dertosa in 506 AD.

My questions are: 1) How many local rulers were there at the time of the Fall of the Roman Empire in the late 5th and early 6th century?

2) What was the last existing Roman rump state to be conquered by one of the Germanic kingdoms?

10
  • There was no "states" until the modern times.
    – Alex
    Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 3:47
  • 2
    How do you define "rump state"? Many of the germanic tribes entered the Roman Empire as allies or foederati, and for a time claimed to be acting as Roma's allies. Depending on the definition, maybe you could defend that the Visigothic kingdom was one of such states.
    – SJuan76
    Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 8:22
  • In the case of the late Western Roman Empire, I define rump state as a remnant of the former Empire. Further prerequisites are Latin as official language and a ruler , who was educated in the Roman Empire or was at least born in the Empire before 476. Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 19:24
  • Some Germanic kings were also educated in the Roman Empire , but they do not count for me , because none of them had Latin as their maternal tongue. Arbogast , the Roman ruler of Trier in the 480s was also of Frankish descent , but clearly Roman. Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 19:39
  • 2
    Comments are ephemeral, and subject to arbitrary deletion at any time. Please edit all clarifications of the question into the question itself. Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 20:52

2 Answers 2

2

There were several Berber/Roman rump states in North Africa.

One was the Mauro-Roman Kingdom in North Africa from about 429-578.

In one inscription King Masuna described himself as Rex gentium Maurorum et Romanorum, King of the Moorish and Roman Peoples", which indicates his realm was a sort of a Roman rump state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauro-Roman_Kingdom1

In another rump state, the Kingdom of the Aures, King Masties ruled from about 426-494 or 449-516; an inscription claims that he ruled for 67 years as a Dux - military leader or duke - and for 40 or 10 of those years as Emperor of "Romans and Moors". A title that reminds me of the Bulgarian title of "Emperor of the Bulgarians and the Romans" or of Stefan Dushan's title of "Emperor of the Serbs and the Romans".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masties2

Some of those Roman-Berber rump states may have been conquered by the Kingdom of the Vandals. The Roman Empire reconquered much of North Africa in the Vandalic War in 533.

In the 570s King Garmul of the Mauro-Roman Kingdom attacked Roman Africa and in 577-579 he was defeated and killed. Part of the Mauro-Roman Kingdom was annexed to the Roman Empire and other parts became as many as eight successor kingdoms which might be considered Roman rump states to some degree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Altava3

These states were gradually conquered and/or converted to Islam during the invasions of North Africa by the Caliphate from about 647 to 698.

A Queen Dihya (died c. 700) was a famous leader of resistance to the Muslim invaders of Africa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihya4

And of course there were a number of Romano-British states in Britain after 411. The Anglo-Saxon invaders of Britain didn't complete their conquest of those Romano-British states until the conquest of Gwynedd in 1282/83.

3
  • I don't think you are answering OP's literal question: "2) What was the last existing Roman rump state to be conquered by one of the Germanic kingdoms?" If you think OP's intent has been misstated in his post you should ask for clarification. Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 20:11
  • 1
    @PieterGeerkens It provides a partial answer to OP's first question (how many were there?).
    – 0range
    Commented Dec 20, 2018 at 0:01
  • Okay, fair enough. Commented Dec 20, 2018 at 2:11
1

The last such rump to fall would appear to be what became Wessex, with the defeat and death of a British king named Natanleod by the Saxons Cerdic and Cynric, in 519 CE.

At some point one must draw a line and claim that all semblance of "Roman rule" has ended, and all that are left are local warlords of no significance. Where that line is drawn is always a matter of opinion. As Britannia was a single province, I chose to draw the line when it's most significant and wealthiest region had fallen, so that no remaining warlords had any semblance of a claim to "Roman legitimacy".

5
  • Do you also know , if there were any Roman Rump states in Spain and France after the death of Peter ( 506 AD) and Syagrius(486 AD) Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 1:06
  • @FriedrichWilhelm1vonpreuss: Not that I know of, or was able to discover quickly. Let's see if anyone else on the site finds something over the next few days. Commented Dec 19, 2018 at 3:22
  • @Pieter Geerkens There were a number of other Romano-British states in Britain. Many in southern England were not conquered until later during the 6th century some time before the mission of St. Augustine in 597, and some in northern England were not conquered until the 7th century and later, while Cornwall, Wales, and Cumbria remained independent much later. So some British states could have been conquered after 519 who had rulers born in the Roman empire before 476. & the early dates in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle are not considered very accurate.
    – MAGolding
    Commented Dec 20, 2018 at 18:34
  • @MAGolding: At some point one must draw a line and claim that all semblance of "Roman rule" has ended, and all that are left are local warlords of no significance. Where that line is drawn is always a matter of opinion. As Britannia was a single province, I chose to draw the line when it's most significant and wealthiest region had fallen, and that no remaining warlords had any semblance of a claim to "Roman legitimacy" Commented Dec 20, 2018 at 18:39
  • @Pieter Geerkens By 400 Roman Britain was a vicarate, not a single province. It had five provinces by 400, the location of which is controversial. And it is quite possible that some of the"local warlords" in Britain after 519 ruled kingdoms larger and more significant that the average kingdom throughout history was.
    – MAGolding
    Commented Dec 23, 2018 at 15:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.