512 Cohen
sources for the later phase of the Ostrogothic kingdom use ‘Arian’ to describe
the religion of the Goths, they are making a heresiological rather than a his-
torical statement about the supposed Gothic fidelity to the teachings of Arius.46
But ‘Arianism’ was not merely a rhetorical construct. The discourse of her-
esiology could, especially through the application of law, create the very cat-
egories of disbelief it had been thought only to describe or explain.47 Indeed
the label ‘Arian’ was eventually successfully applied to the Ostrogoths, but this
did not occur until the last years of Theoderic’s reign and after. In contrast,
our Italian Nicene sources for the early phase of kingdom conspicuously avoid
using the term to describe the religion of the Ostrogoths. For instance, in the
surviving correspondence of Gelasius neither ‘Arian’ nor ‘Arianism’ was ever
applied to the Ostrogoths.48 Instead, Gelasius describes the religion of the
Gothic comes Teia as an alter communio, a neutral phrase that discriminates
between the Catholic Church and that of the Goths, but avoids condemning
the Gothic faith as heretical.49 Similarly, Theoderic complaining that he did
not wish to interfere in the internal affairs of the church during the Laurentian/
Symmachian schism, referred to the faith of the Roman Church as vestra religio.50
And despite his protestations to the contrary, Theoderic did play a crucial role
in deciding the outcome of the schism. According to the account preserved in
the Liber Pontificalis, the partisans of Symmachus and Laurence, both of whom
had been elected to the episcopacy of Rome, agreed that the Ostrogothic king
would adjudicate their claims.51 Aliena religio, a comparable expression to
46 On the problematic relationship between the teachings of Arius and those of Ulfila, for
example, see Heather/Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, pp. 35–141, Schäferdiek,
“Ulfila Und Der Sogenannte Gotische Arianismus”, 22–3.
47 Humfress, Orthodoxy and the Courts, pp. 241–2. I would like to thank Robin Whelan for his
comments on this section.
48 For Gelasius, ‘Arian’ and ‘Arianism’ were epithets not applied to the Goths, but rather
to the supporters of the Henotikon in the context of the ongoing Acacian schism. For
what follows and in particular on Gelasius’ views of ‘Arianism’ and the religion of the
Ostrogoths see the discussion in Cohen, Heresy, Authority, pp. 187–211.
49 Gelasius, ETV ep. 2, ed. Mommsen, pp. 387–92. PLRE, vol. 2, Teia 2. Also Amory, People
and Identity, p. 420: TEIA/ZEIA. He is described as a vir sublisimus, comes, possibly the
comes civitatis of Volaterra and/or the Gothic commander of the garrison there. Volaterra/
Volaterana is today Volterra in eastern Tuscany.
50 The phrase is contained in Theoderic’s letter preserved as the “Anagnosticum regis” = Acta
Synhodorum habitae Romae 5, ed. T. Mommsen, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, aucto-
res antiquissimi, Berlin 1894, vol. 12, pp. 425–6.
51 Liber Pontificalis (hereafter LP), ed. Duchesne, vol. I, p. 255. Theoderic played an ongoing
role in the schism, at first supporting Symmachus’ candidacy for bishop of Rome, then
withdrawing this support, only to ultimately rule again in favour of Symmachus. However