Religious Diversity 523
polemical and formulaic nature of his condemnations make an analysis of
rural religion in southern Ostrogothic-controlled Gaul problematic.106
More troubling for orthodox authorities in the Ostrogothic kingdom was the
presence of Christian heretics, especially Pelagianism. Gelasius wrote a long
tractate condemning the heresy, adversus Pelagiam haeresim,107 as well as a
number of letters to bishops in Picenum on the north-east coast of Italy and
Dalmatia, the province opposite Picenum on the east coast of the Adriatic Sea.
From Gelasius’ perspective, the appearance of Pelagianism reflected serious
failures of these local churches to enforce discipline—failures that prompted
Rome’s direct intervention. And at least in the case of Picenum, the spread of
heretical ideas was exacerbated by ‘the barbarians’—here likely a reference to
the conflict between Odovacer and Theoderic that had caused devastation in
northern Italy.108 To Honorius of Dalmatia Gelasius chastised the bishop for
failing to properly watch over his clergy and flock—a failure that permitted the
recurring weed of Pelagianism (recidiva Pelagianae pestis zizania) to resurface
even after its repeated condemnation by the bishops of Rome.109 In a slightly
different context the Pelagian controversy also troubled Hormisdas in 519–20
when John Maxentius and his Scythian monks, then residing at Rome, together
with their North African supporters including Fulgentius of Ruspe attempted
to have the teachings of Faustus of Riez condemned as Pelagian. Hormisdas
was less than impressed.110
In addition to Pelagianism 6th-century Italian sources also refer the her-
esy of Manichaeism. The Liber Pontificalis reports that Gelasius, Symmachus,
and Hormisdas discovered Manicheans in Rome, and all three bishops are said
to have burned Manichean books and to have sent the heretics themselves
into exile.111 But in Late Antiquity ‘Manicheanism’, like ‘Arianism’, was used by
orthodox polemicists in an increasingly abstract and epithetical manner.112 For
example, Symmachus himself is called a Manichean by Emperor Anastasius
and Roman bishops including Symmachus commonly compared their
106 Klingshirn, Caearius of Arles, pp. 209–10.
107 Gelasius, tractatus adversus Pelagiam haeresim, ed. Thiel, tract. 5, pp. 571–98.
108 Gelasius, ep. 6.1, ed. Thiel, pp. 325–35. “sed quantum inter ipsa recentium calamitatum
ferventia pericula comperimus, perniciosiorem diabolus Christianorum mentibus labem,
quam corporibus hostilis feritas, irrogavit.”
109 Gelasius, ep. 4.1,3, ed. Thiel, pp. 321–3.
110 Hormasdas, ep. 124, ed. Thiel, pp. 926–31.
111 LP, ed. Duchesne, vol. 1, pp. 270–1.
112 Despite the tendency among orthodox polemicists to describe Manicheanism as mono-
lithic, the nature of the Manichean religion, especially in North Africa, was fluid. See, for
instance, Lim, “Unity and Diversity” and “Nomen Manichaeorum”.