514 Cohen
used in Gelasius’ letters to members of the Ostrogothic regime persists in his
correspondence with other Catholic bishops.56
Similarly, Theoderic’s heterodoxy does not seem to have troubled the two
most famous supporters of the Ostrogothic regime: the Italian Catholics
Ennodius and Cassiodorus. Ennodius’ writings in particular often use specifi-
cally Christian imagery to describe the king. The Vita Epiphanii, for example,
portrays Theoderic as a pious and just Christian ruler comparable to King
David (whom Theoderic surpasses).57 Throughout the text Theoderic treats
Epiphanius with admiration and reverence while Theoderic’s rule is described
as divinely sanctioned. The king even cites scripture in his conversation with
Epiphanius.58 In short, Theoderic is depicted as a good Christian ruler. Ennodius
also penned his famous panegyric for Theoderic in early 507, and even in his
private correspondence he praises the king. Nowhere does Ennodius call
Theoderic an Arian.59 Nor was the faith of the Goths seen as problematic for
Cassiodorus, author of the Variae written on behalf of the Ostrogothic regime
and as a chronicle and a history of the Goths. The chronicle in particular was
carefully crafted to present the Goths in the best possible light, for instance by
shrewdly substituting the ecumenical term christiana for catholica when the
author thought it prudent to do so.60 Even texts from slightly further afield
such as the vita of Caesarius of Arles portray Theoderic as a wise and pious
king.61 This positive view of Theoderic and his regime is also echoed by other
members of Rome’s Christian elite, although it must be said that public decla-
56 E.g. Gelasius frag. 13, ed. Thiel, p. 490 to Quinigesius and Constantinus: “ad comitatum
filii mei regis... vir praecellentissimus filius meus Theodericus rex.. .”; frag. 11, ed. Thiel,
p. 489 to bishops Gerontius and John, “ad comitatum domini filii nostri [sc. Theoderic].. .”
57 Ennodius, Vita Epiphanii (hereafter VE) 144, ed. and trans. Cook. See also the discus-
sion in Cesa’s Italian edition of the VE, p. 157. On the Vita Epiphanii and its depiction of
Theoderic as a Christian (and Roman) ruler see Arnold, Theoderic and the Roman Imperial
Restoration, pp. 181–94.
58 In recounting Epiphanius’ embassy to Theoderic, which sought the restoration of legal
privileges for the former partisans of the now-deposed Odovacer, the saint appeals
directly to the king’s sense of himself as a Christian. Theoderic responded by pointing
to Saul’s failure to exterminate the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15) before ultimately agreeing to
Epiphanius’ petition. Ennodius, VE 125–35, pp. 82–7.
59 See also Ennodius’ letter to Caesarius of Arles (not Symmachus, as Vogel thought), ep.
9.30, 10 (op. 458), ed. Vogel, pp. 318–19. On the addressee of this letter see Amory, People
and Identity, p. 206, n. 52.
60 For example, Cassiodorus’ Chronica, a. 380, ed. Mommsen, p. 153 renames Ambrose’
pro catholica fide, as the work is called in Prosper’s chronicle, to de christiania fide. See
O’Donnell, Cassiodorus, pp. 36–43, especially pp. 38–9.
61 Vita Caesarii I. 36, ed. and trans. Bona, pp. 102–5.