The expansion of Rome throughout Europe began approximately 2300 years ago, what later would give rise to the Roman Empire. By that time, it is very likely that the family of languages of Basque stock, if existed, had already disappeared and only Euskara could survive during those times.

The studies that have been carried out to know the linguistic situation in the first century A.D., show that the Basque language was spoken on both sides of the Pyrenees at that time, from the Cantabric sea to the Mediterranean.

The subject that has not been clarified yet is about the peninsular linguistic situation concerning the Cantabric Coast, concretely towards west from the modern Basque territory. Although nobody questioned until recently that the tribes that inhabited those lands were Celtic-speakers and therefore, they were Celtiberian tribes, the study of the linguistic substratum of languages like Galician, Astur-Leonese as well as northwestern Castilian highlighted a Basque substratum which was already described by the linguist Antonio Tovar in the last century, who stated that the Basque language was spoken even near Galicia two thousand years ago. That statement questioned the Celtic origin of human groups like Astures and Cantabrians, what might lead to assume that those tribes were Basques, although with a heavily celtizied culture, and that they did not stop speaking Basque. However, this matter is still waiting for more linguistic studies about that region to clarify the supposed Basque origin of those tribes at that time since according to some linguists, the Celts, that gave rise to Astures and Cantabrians, could have taken the Basque substratum, which existed there since prehistoric times, and that later would be transferred to the Romance languages that appeared after Romanisation.

The territory of the Basque tribes at the arrival of the Romans (196 BC)The Greek geographer Strabo (63 B.C.-A.D. 24) indicated the location of the following tribes, which are considered Basque speakers according to the current information available: Aquitanians, Autrigones, Caristii, Varduli and Vascones.

Those tribes extended towards north up to near Bordeaux, southwards up to the Ebro river, to the west up to part of eastern Cantabria and to east, up to part of northwest Aragón. However, people of Basque speech were already spread throughout the peninsular Pyrenees up to Catalonia, at least since 3rd-2nd centuries B.C...

There is considerable controversy among the philologists about if each of the tribes, which were described by the Greco-Roman geographers, spoke a language of Basque stock, whether it was a dialect of the same language, Euskara, or even if the western tribes (Autrigones, Caristii and Varduli) were not Basque tribes, but Celtiberians and therefore they spoke Celtic, since there is no written evidence of the speech of each tribe to confirm this fact. What we only have is an account of personal names and gods of Basque origin, especially the ones that have been recovered from the Latin inscriptions of the Roman Age in the region of Aquitaine.

There also are Latin inscriptions with names and Basque gods of the same age (1st-3rd centuries A.D.) in Álava, Guipúzcoa, Navarre, Soria and in the province of Zaragoza, although they are fewer than the ones from Aquitaine. This indicates that Aquitaine was romanized more quickly and started to write in Latin before the southern Pyrenean regions did it. This was probably due to that Aquitaine was a very important agricultural area to the Empire thanks to its fertile fields, what made the native language disappear sooner in comparison to other areas of Basque speech.

The nouns that we use to name the Basque tribes are of celtic origin, what intensifies the controversy even more. The extension of the current western Basque dialects exactly match the former lands of each one of the tribes that were described by the Greco-Roman geographers, what led some linguists to think that every tribe had its own dialect, or that even spoke a language of Basque stock.

Another of the most discussed origins is the one of the Berones tribe that inhabited part of the modern La Rioja. Some historians considered the Berones as other Basque tribe. On the contrary, others considered them as a Celtiberian tribe. (As we know, the Celtiberians were Celtic ethnic groups that lived in the Iberian peninsula).

Based on the bone studies that were carried out at archaeological sites in the Cantabrian Basque area and in Gascony (France), it is known that their inhabitants belonged racially to what Antropology designates as Western-Pyrenean type or Basque type (a local evolution of the Cro-Magnon man), while in the south of the Basque Country (southern Álava and Navarre) and in the Beronian area, the population was very heterogeneous and had different European origins (Mediterraneans, Alpines, Dinarics...), what hinders a Basque origin for this tribe. Although the Basque-speech ethnic groups had already taken over control of the southern territories when the Romans arrived, the studies in Beronian anthroponyms (personal names) of the same period reveal as well a Celtic origin and therefore, a non-Basque origin.

There were other tribes that have been erroneously considered Basques due to their proximity, as is the case with the Iacetani of Huesca. It should be remembered that the Basque population coexisted with Celts and Iberians in the whole Pyrenean area and by virtue of the alliance between the Basque tribes and Rome, the territories conquered to Celtiberians and Iberians were later repopulated by Basque-speakers. 

The fact that the towns and lands of the western Pyrenean area, western Zaragoza, La Rioja and northeastern Castile were already registered as Basques during the Roman Imperial period has contributed to the above-mentioned wrong assumptions, when those territories were in fact Celtiberian or Iberian before the Roman conquest. For example, the Celtiberian population of La Rioja was nearly exterminated by the Romans and their lands were later repopulated by Basques.

Bacchus mosaic found at the Vascon town of Andelos (Mendigorría, Navarre)The alliance between the peninsular Basque tribes and Rome against common enemies was the main cause by which the Basque culture was the only Pre-Roman one that survived the expansion of Rome. This factor was essential to ensure the Basque survival, as well as the late development of the 'Mare Externum' (Atlantic Ocean) as a strategic economical area to the Empire, since it allowed the Basque region to be out of the strong migratory flows that the other peninsular areas or Aquitaine had to face due to their high agricultural value.

Toponymy indicates that the region settled by the Basque tribes is of Basque origin for the most part, and the existence of Celtic toponyms is minimal, but they increase when going southwards. The Basque population was not homogeneous at the arrival of the Romans and there were Celtic villages such as Deba (a town on the coast of Guipúzcoa, which was in turn the border between Caristii and Varduli), and the valley of Ultzama in Navarre (in the middle of the Vascon territory).

Therefore, the diverse historical studies as well as toponymy show us that the tribes that inhabited the modern Euskadi during Roman times did not speak Celtic, but a language of the Basque stock. Furthermore, there were also individuals of Celtic speech in the western area of Biscay, in part of Álava and in Tierra Estella (Navarre) and people of Iberian speech towards central and eastern Navarre. Gaul possibly was introduced in Aquitaine along the Garonne up to the Pyrenees and the most exposed areas of the current Gascony. The phonetic evolution of the Latin toponyms in Euskadi during the Roman period can only be explained by the Basque phonetic features, what also invalidates the Celtic origin of Autrigones, Caristii and Varduli. Once we reach this point, some questions start to arise:

Did the different Basque tribes speak the same language? Did they speak dialects of the same language? How is it possible that western and eastern Basque speakers that lived isolated from one another for centuries, had the same grammar in which only part of its vocabulary and some verbal desinences were different? This is a surprising fact if we bear in mind that Romanisation influenced the verbal conjugation in a very important way.

 

Toponymic remains in the central area of the peninsular Pyrenees. Click the map to enlarge

 

By means of dialectology, it is clearly shown that the areas currently settled by each one of the Basque dialects (known in Euskara as 'euskalkis') in the western Basque Country exactly match the Pre-Roman tribal demarcation. The territory of the Caristii extended up to the Deba river (Guipúzoa), and now the Biscayan dialect is spoken up to the limits of that river. On the other hand, the Varduli were settled in the territory from the Deba towards east and today, the dialect of Guipúzcoa is spoken there although with an exception: the city of Irún is placed in the province of Guipúzcoa, but there is not spoken the corresponding dialect. The language spoken there is a mixture of Navarrese, Navarrese-Labourdin and the dialect of Guipúzcoa, the three dialects that converge at that point. The reason for this situation can be found in the Roman records, which described the lands of Irún (the Roman Oiasso) as not belonging to the Varduli, but to the Vascon tribe.

At this point, how is it possible that Romanisation suddenly impacted the verbal articulation of all the current Basque dialects in the same way? How is that the verbs are conjugated almost the same in the whole Basque Country, if one of the tribes did not assimilate the others and bearing in mind the fact that the Basque speakers lived isolated from one another for such a long time?

And finally, how is that it was talked about the different Basque tribes in Roman times and subsequently the Merovingian and Visigothic chronicles suddenly used the term Vascones to name all the Basques?

 

 

 

Share this page!

 

 

 

 

The History of Euskara continues on the following page >> Common Euskara