104 Marazzi
centres.17 This implies once again that Theoderic depended heavily upon the
regular functioning of city councils, which (under the supervision of the prae-
torian praefectura) determined the success of the whole system that had inte-
grated the Goths within a city-based framework.
Nevertheless, the practical approach taken by Theoderic to maintain the
city-based administrative system inherited from the empire relied on a firm
ideological foundation. Within a strongly centralized system, cities were both
the most expedient and the most efficient mechanism for solidifying the unity
of the Ostrogothic kingdom. But for Theoderic, cities also represented the ideal
context in which to engineer confraternity between Romans and Goths. It was
in cities that the newcomers could display their skills in preserving the pres-
tigious traditions of the Roman Empire, thereby demonstrating their mastery
of those traditions and legitimizing the place in history they had claimed by
installing themselves at the heart of the former empire. From this perspec-
tive, cities were the stage where the king performed the role of the restorer
of the decus (beauty) and decor (dignity) of civilized life. Cassiodorus’ Variae
and a number of inscriptions bear witness to the display of the king’s personal
munificence towards urban spaces and also to his sollicitudo (care) that every
urban community should acknowledge its obligation to contribute to the same
goal. A recent and detailed survey of the Variae made by Valérie Fauvinet-
Ranson offers a full picture of the vast range of matters Theoderic dealt with
concerning construction, reconstruction, conservation, appropriate use, and
management of buildings, walls, roads, and other kinds of public spaces within
cities.18 What appears particularly remarkable is that Goths were involved in
this task as well as Romans. For instance, between 506 and 511 a letter sent
“to all Goths and Romans” required that they collect from their fields all the
stones that could be considered useful for the repair of city walls (Variae 1.28).
From approximately the same period the Gothic count Suna was ordered to
ascertain the provenance of marble blocks destined for the repair of city walls
(Variae 2.7), while another letter required the vir spectabilis Tancila to locate a
statue stolen in the city of Como (Variae 2.35).
Unfortunately, it is impossible to understand how and where the Ostrogoths
settled within the cities. No reference to this is given in written sources, nor
does archaeological evidence provide useful positive information.19 The clos-
est available data are found in the Formula comitivae Gothorum per singulas
17 Porena, L’insediamento degli Ostrogoti. See Halsall in this volume for a more detailed dis-
cussion of the debate over the terms of accommodation.
18 Fauvinet-Ranson, Decor civitatis, pp. 47–195 and 303–77.
19 Tabata, Città dell’Italia, pp. 117–24.