Bishops, Ecclesiastical Institutions, and the Ostrogothic Regime 463
The bishop of Aosta, therefore, was a pro-Symmachan bishop, just as his met-
ropolitan Eustorgius of Milan and other bishops of north-west Italy (Tigridius
of Turin, Emilianus of Vercelli, Maximus of Pavia, Cassian and then Bassus of
Modena, Eustathius of Cremona, Laurentius of Bergamo, and Servusdei of
Verona). He opposed Laurentius’ supporters, namely Marcellianus of Aquileia,
who had urged Eustorgius’ predecessor to “renounce a nefarious error” to no
effect.55 The accusation of proditio directed at the bishop of Aosta, therefore,
may have been a strategy of the clergy in the wake of the Gallic military crisis
to replace their prelate with a follower of Laurentius at a time when the papal
schism had not yet been fully decided in favour of Symmachus.56 The action
of the clergy evidently succeeded in obstructing, if not necessarily replacing,
the accused bishop, as Theoderic ordered Eustorgius to reinstate him with
all rights.57
The letter of Theoderic to Eustorgius implicitly confirms that modifications
to the metropolitan structure of the West, which began during the 5th cen-
tury, had already obtained some semblance of stability in northern Italy.58 The
text also proves that Milan’s metropolitan privileges were confirmed in years of
military conflict, when the geographic scope of the metropolis may have been
the subject of discussion and redefinition. In fact this was what happened
in Gaul, where the long-standing dispute between the bishop of Vienne (the
administrative capital of Viennoise and the metropolitan see) and the bishop
of Arles (the new seat of the Gallic prefecture) was resolved by the Roman
bishop Symmachus in favour of Caesarius. Leaving from Ravenna after his
summons, Caesarius unsurprisingly set off for Rome, where he obtained con-
firmation of metropolitan rights and the symbols of power (such as the right to
wear the pallium). These acts made him the privileged intermediary with the
pope and the representative of Rome in Gaul and Spain, once again restored
in eighth place (with Tigridius in ninth): Acta Syn. Rom. 2, 6, 25 and 3, 19, ed. Mommsen,
pp. 435 and 452.
55 Ennodius, no. 117 (Ep. 4.1), p. 129, lines 9–12. Eustorgius’ predecessor was Laurentius of
Milan.
56 The onset of the military crisis in southern Gaul between 507 and 508 may have slowed
communications between Rome and Aosta (Augusta Praetoria).
57 Cass., Va r. 1.9, ed. Fridh, p. 19, lines 10–11: “qui a vobis honori pristino restitutus ius habeat
episcopatus omne quod habuit.”
58 On the metropolitan organization of the church see Hall, “Organization of the Church”,
pp. 731. This was implemented very slowly in the West: Bleckmann, “Arelate metropolis”.
On the situation in northern Italy see Humphries, Communities of the Blessed, pp. 137–86;
Otranto, Per una storia dell’Italia tardo antica cristiana, and Lizzi Testa’s other contribu-
tion in this volume.