Feminine fertility being of dynastical relevance, sources are specifically interested in births. The uterus perpetuates Roman blood, and he who is born from a mother shrouded in purple, can claim the throne. The existence of Roman-Barbarian alliances highlights the power women could wield in integrating the Empire. This "hyphen" role doesn't elude Vandal king Genseric, as he arranges a marriage to Theodosian princess Eudocia for his son Huneric in 455. Clear proof of his aspirations, this union grants him a privileged bond with the Empire and the imperial power. Gemini diademetis heres, their son Hilderic embodies the continuity of the Theodosian blood. The feminine figure must be seen as a central element in these Roman-Barbarian marriages as she provides the Roman blood, which is passed on to potential children, despite the barbarian paternity. When Hilderic's children arrive in Constantinople, Justinian and Theodora's welcoming ratifies their illustrious roman kinship, over their Vandal lineage.
The hagiographic biography of Fulgentius of Ruspe shows two forms of Nicene resistance to Vandal Arianism at the end of the fifth and beginning of the sixth century: the creation of monasteries to compensate the persecution of the Nicene Church and the religious controversies. Some members of the African elites could compensate the compromissions engendered by participation in the Vandal administration by financing new monasteries and creating links with charismatic monks such as Fulgentius. In fact, the Vandal kings seldom persecuted the Nicene monasteries as if they granted them a necessary space of freedom. The debate organised by Thrasamund between 517 and 519 in Carthage with Fulgentius denoted the will of this king to give the African elite a new model of behaviour, combining mastery of classical culture and theological knowledge. Some of Fulgentius' letters show that this policy was successful. Theology was integrated into the literary otium, especially in the dinner parties. The idea of the good acceptance by African elites of a religiously neutral secular space promoted by Vandal kings, often based only on the study of poems from the Anthologia Latina, should therefore be questioned. However, Fulgentius, who has always showed his loyalty, paradoxically contributed by his actions to make the Vandal regime more acceptable to the Nicene elites, since he was a kind of objective ally of their kings.
In Dracontius' works, we recognize the different attitudes adopted by an Afro-Roman intellectual who seeks a dialogue with the Vandal power and tries to propose a modus uiuendi between (Arian) rulers and (Catholic) people. The praise of a (real or desired) project of cultural integration based on the school of rhetoric and Roman tradition (Romulea, 1) then leaves place to the complaint and denunciation of despotism and abuses of power (Controuersia de statua uiri fortis). Later, during his captivity, the poet addresses the Vandal king an earnest request for forgiveness, which also constitutes a smart political proposal aimed at promoting a peaceful coexistence between Arians and Catholics (Satisfactio). The pathetic failure of this attempt drives him to take an uncompromising position, resolutely opposing to Arianism in the name of the Nicene Creed (Laudes Dei).
The poets of Latin Anthology from Vandal era, who can be reasonably assumed to be Romans and Nicene Christians, are court poets. Logically, they chose to avoid potentially upsetting topics, namely politics and religion, in favor of a celebration of Vandal kings and their accomplishments. However, it is possible, in some of their poems and in the interstices of their speech, to distinguish more or less veiled elements of criticism. We therefore note and study these few elements of criticism, then we engage in a comparison with contemporary Christian authors opposed to the Arian Vandals (Victor of Vita, Quodvultdeus, Fulgence of Ruspe) and whose works belong to completely different literary genres. In particular, we distinguish between lay authors and authors belonging to the Church, and between exiles who may have freer speech, and others, who must speak with caution.
