Laminium was an oppidum (fortified city), the southernmost of the Carpetan tribe and head of the Ager Laminitanus.The ager was the cultivated part of the countryside, according to the classification of spaces of Roman times, which would be equivalent to the current concept of municipal area. Pliny the Elder and Ptolemy make references to it on several occasions.

The Roman Laminium acquired the status of Flavian municipality (municipio flavio), with the privileges that it entailed, like other cities such as Complutum, Toletum or Consaburum, which leads us to believe that it would have a certain importance in terms of civil and religious works. It was also part of the main Roman road network, as an important communications hub. In the so-called Itinerary of Antoninus it is locatedMost authors consider that all of them refer to the same city, although there is no unanimity. on the roads:

XXIX, Caesaraugusta-Augusta Emerita. XXX, Laminio-Toletum. XXXI, Laminio-Libisosa.

Currently the most widespread theory is that Laminium is located in the current urban area of Alhambra. However, since ancient times there have been other hypotheses about its location, so there is a certain legend in La Mancha of a "lost city" around it that has fueled interest in its search and perhaps has magnified its real importance. The latest archaeological excavations in Alhambra reveal the existence of a large oppidum.

Classical testimonies

Pliny

Pliny refers, among the most important communities of the conventus carthaginensis, to the consaburenses (Consabura), the egelestani (Egelesta), the laminitani (Laminium), the segobrigenses (Segóbriga), who form the "head" of Celtiberia and the toletani (Toletum), who form the "head" of Carpetania. Likewise, he affirms that the river Anas (Guadiana) rises in the Laminitanian countryside.

In northwest direction, and if we consider the usual equivalence of 1 Roman mile = 1480 meters, the Itinerary of Antoninus places Laminio at about 11 km (7 Roman miles) from Caput Fluminis Anae (on the Libisosa-Laminio road) and this mansion at 21 km (14 Roman miles) from Libisosa (today's Lezuza). The name of this mansion is in accusative, which may suggest that it would be a point on the road from where a road to the source of the Guadiana River would start and not necessarily a town located at the headwaters of the Anas River.

Due to its proximity to Laminio and to a safe location (Lezuza), the location of this place has been one of the main objectives of the researchers as a previous step to the discovery of the city. But it has also turned out to be one of the most important sources of controversy, since to this day people are still trying to determine where exactly the river rises. In fact, the theories that locate Laminio in Alhambra and Daimiel take into account the proximity to the place where one of the sources of the Guadiana (Ojos del Guadiana) is located, but they ignore the excessive distance (more than 70 km) with Lezuza, alleging medieval translation errors. Such a considerable distance is not a trivial matter and seems difficult to assume for a people as pragmatic as the Romans, since it is almost double what it is considered that one could travel in that time in one day.

Based on works from the Muslim and medieval periods, other authors determine that, as for the Romans, the sources of the Anas River would have been located in the Córcoles-Sotuélamos system or in the Lagunas de Ruidera (Alto Guadiana). Paleogeography and archeology seem to support those who maintain these theses, since they affirm that the area, in ancient times, provided much more water to the Anas than it does today. It is even claimed that the Záncara constituted for millennia the true upper course of the river.

A Caput Fluminis Anae and a Laminio in the surroundings of the Córcoles would solve the problem of the distances for the Routes XXIX and XXXI of the Itinerary of Antoninus. On the other hand, it would create the problem of fitting the distances of Via XXX (the one to Toletum), which is the shortest and has two perfectly located mansions. To solve this problem, Gonzalo Arias suggested several possibilities: That the "Limini" of Via XXX is a different mansion from the "Laminio" of Via XXXI. That the "Limini" of Via XXX refers to the limit (Lamine in Latin) of the municipality of Laminio (not to the urban enclave) and in reality this road runs between Toledo and that point (Junction theory). That intermediate mansions are missing in the original text, possibly from very early times and the different later copyists have amended and squared the distances.Pliny also suggests that the Laminitanian sharpening stones were the best of their kind in the whole Empire.

Theories about its location Throughout history, the city of Laminium has been located in many different places within a very large area that, although entirely in the natural region of La Mancha, covers parts of the provinces of Ciudad Real and Albacete. Nowadays, universities and academies reduce Laminium to the current municipality of Alhambra. However, since ancient times there has been a tradition of local historians who have tried to reduce it to other points. Thus, a site has been proposed in the vicinity of Daimiel or in another site located between the municipalities of El Bonillo and Villarrobledo, in the province of Albacete.

Western Laminio (near Daimiel)

Rodríguez Morales locates Laminio in the city of Daimiel. He argues in favor of its proximity to one of the places considered to be the source of the Guadiana River and its location near the Tablas de Daimiel, suggesting that, etymologically, Laminio would mean something similar to 'city of the lakes' or 'the marshes'. Likewise, it is maintained that the current name of Daimiel is nothing more than a phonetic corruption of Laminio.

Against this theory is adduced the excessive distance that exists from Libisosa (more than 70 km), the fact of having taken into account a modern hypothesis of the source of the Guadiana River, the lack of certainty about the etymology of Laminio and the little Roman archaeological evidence in the area. This theory is very unlikely, since we should presume an excessive error in the calculation of the distances from Lezuza. In addition, the etymology of the name of the city is highly disputed and there is very little evidence supporting the city of the marshes.

The central Laminium (Alhambra) It is currently the most accepted theory by specialists thanks to Alföldy's work on the Roman presence in Hispania. It locates Laminio in the current urban area of Alhambra (Ciudad Real) and is based on the existence of important Roman vestiges in its area. This theory has been recently supported by the studies of Luis Andrés Domingo Puertas. The success of the theory of Luis Andrés Domingo Puertas has allowed a breakthrough in the knowledge of Roman antiquity in Ciudad Real, with studies such as those of Moya-Maleno (2008), Benítez de Lugo or Gómez Torrijos (2011). In its defense, we find that the location of Alhambra corresponds to the model of Oppida Carpetanos, numerous remains of Roman pedestals, inscriptions, statues and two necropolises have been discovered in the urban area, indicating that the place was a municipality in the Flavian period. Also in the vicinity there have existed until recently several sandstone quarries, especially that of the Molares that in the 19th century were still used to sharpen barber's tools and weapons.Moya-Maleno, 2008 Alhambra also shares acceptable distances with Caput Flumini Anae (Lagunas de Ruidera) and with Libisosa, in addition to having a road that, effectively, goes to Consuegra on one side and, on the other, to Cástulo through Barranco Hondo. In addition, in its vicinity (El Puerto de Vallehermoso or La Fuenlabrada according to the authors)José Cándido de Peñafiel in his 1833 Report to the Real Academia de la Historia on the epigraph is categorical: It was found in La Fuenlabrada (Villahermosa, between Fuenllana and Carrizosa) and not in Puerto de Vallehermoso (Alhambra), however almost all later authors consider the second location to be valid. has been found the only inscription of the entire province that makes direct reference to Laminium. Alhambra has a museum of Roman archaeology and is the only town that exhibits in its main square a set of Roman pedestals and statues.

L-LIVIVS-LVPVS-

GENIO-MVNICI

PI-LAMINITANI

LOCO-DATO-EX

DECRETO-ORDI

NIS-SIGNVM

ARGENTEVM CVM BOMO (sic) SVA

PECVNIA FECIT

IDEMQVE

DEDICAVIT

Inscription from Puerto de Vallehermoso or La Fuenlabrada (E. Hübner, CIL II, 3228)The references to Laminio may be merely circumstantial since, on many occasions, the remains of abandoned cities were reused in others, as a quarry. In fact, the pedestal with this epigraph is found in Fuenllana (Ciudad Real) since 1530, as we know from the Relaciones histórico-geográfico-estadísticas de los pueblos de España made on the initiative of Felipe II (1575) about this locality:... and also there is a stone with an old sign in a doorway of a neighbor of this town that is called Juan Patón that was put in the mentioned doorway forty years ago little more or less and the mentioned stone was brought with its sign made of some villares that are where they say the Port of Vallhermoso that will be three leagues from this town....

Topographic Relations of the towns from Spain, made under the command of Philip II (in Spanish: Relaciones histórico-geográfico-estadísticas de los pueblos de España, hechas de orden de Felipe II. Town of Fuenllana)However, not even the sources agree on the exact location where this epigraph was found, since the Royal Academy of History, in its reportPeñafiel, J. C. de Informe sobre un pedestal honorífico de época romana que se encuentra empotrado en la casa de Diego Tomás Ballesteros en Fuenllana, aunque originariamente apareció en Fuenlabrada, signature CAICR/9/3941/04(4) Archivo de la Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid :1833 on this stone, locates the site in another place, Fuenlabrada, far away and in the opposite direction to Vallehermoso. The identity Fuenllana= Laminio based only on the present location of this epigraph seems, clearly, erroneous. In addition, the place of the Fuenlabrada belongs to the municipality of Montiel.

In another epigraph found in the Alhambra itself some authors have wanted to see the name of that important city (it seems that it had abundant civil work) as Anensemarca, although the reading would not support it: ALLIAE-M-F

CANDIDAE

CVRANTE

LICINIA

MACEDONI

CA-MATRE

COLLEC[c.3]

ANENSEM [c.3]

CUSTOMERS-ET

LIBERTI pat

rONae-POS(uerunt)Article by F. Fita in BRAH 1903 on this and other Alhambra inscriptions.[http://descargas.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveObras/45708400981281653343679/024334.pdf].

Inscription found in Alhambra (E. Hübner, CIL II, 3229)Another epigraph mentioning Laminium as a municipium flavium was found in La Carolina (Jaén) and has been used, in view of the remains found in Alhambra, as evidence of the correctness of this theory and the erroneous conviction that this would be the only important city in the area.C-SEMPRONIVS-CELER

CELERI-F-D-D-MVNIC

IPI-BAESVCCITANI

...

MVNICIPIVM-FLAVIVM-LAMINITANVM

D-D-D-LAVDATIONEM-STATVAM

...

Inscription found in La Carolina (Hübner, ad CIL II, 3251)