Mapping the Church and Asceticism in Ostrogothic Italy 483
and Aquileia, requesting that they assemble councils in their respective loca
tions, just like the bishops of Arles and Milan. Two papal letters dated to
442 explicitly reference the exercise of Aquileia’s metropolitan jurisdiction.15
Hence, it seems that during the 5th century, two other sees exercised metro
politan functions in Annonarian Italy along with Milan: Aquileia and Ravenna.
The Variae of Cassiodorus, which contain an obvious reference to the tax privi
leges granted to the see of Ravenna,16 do not, on the other hand, provide any
evidence for the 6thcentury activity of metropolitan Aquileia. Indeed when
a Christian accused the homines ecclesiae of the bishop of Pula of appropriat
ing a property that had belonged to his family for at least two generations,
Theoderic contacted the bishop directly, attempting to solve the issue without
disturbing his metropolitan.17 Despite this silence, however, the strength of the
see of Aquileia is evident in its bishops’ roles during the Laurentian schism
(498–506/7) and later Three Chapters schism (from 553 onward).18
In Suburbicarian Italy the centralizing presence of the bishop of Rome, who
controlled all the dioceses, makes it more difficult to see how the metropolitan
organization evolved over the course of the 5th century. At the end of the 4th
century at least some cities, including Capua, Canosa, Syracuse, and Cagliari,
seem to have gained prominence in their respective provinces.19 From the
reign of Athalaric, however, the pope’s prerogatives as Apostolic Primate were
exalted far more than his metropolitan rights. Already defined by Pope Leo I in
the 5th century, these were strongly supported by the successors of Theoderic,
even Totila.20
Ecclesiastical Dioceses in Ostrogothic Italy
A general extension of the diocesan network during the 5th century corre
sponded with the enrichment of metropolitan sees in northern Italy (Milan,
Aquileia, and Ravenna). In comparison with the 4th century, the number of
Ostrogothic churches is indicated by the subscribing and absent bishops at
15 Leo I, Ep. 1–2, PL 54, coll. 593–8.
16 See Cass., Va r. 2.30, partially cited in n. 7 (above).
17 Cass., Va r. 4.44, ed. Fridh, pp. 171–2.
18 See, generally, Lanzoni, Le diocesi d’Italia, vol. 2, pp. 891–4.
19 Otranto, Per una storia dell’Italia tardoantica, pp. 103–4.
20 On the Apostolic see and its political meaning for the Ostrogothic kings Cass., Va r. 8.24,
9.15.11, and 11.2 are very important. See Lizzi Testa, “Rome during the Ostrogoth Kingdom”;
also Sessa in this volume.