78 Arnold
was sent to Savia late in Theoderic’s reign, provides another case in point.22 His
instructions included a list of local abuses that were of long-standing duration.
In particular, the machinery of tax collection in the region was corrupt, with
many paying less than they should, funds embezzled, rates applied unevenly,
records doctored, and false exemptions offered, all to the injury of the fisc and
the increasingly overburdened provincials. In addition, itinerant judges, who
were supposed to be a source of Roman law and order, were extorting resources
and overstaying their welcome. Not only was this a violation of Roman law,
according to Theoderic, but also it was unjust and patently un-Roman: “Our
ancestors,” he explained, and by this he meant Roman ancestors, “wanted the
travels of judges to exist not for the burden of provincials but for their profit.”23
Ostrogothic rule in Dalmatia-Savia, therefore, was idealized as a continua-
tion or restoration of Roman rule, as a source of protection and justice, both
essential to civilized life. As the possessores of Savia were told, even Theoderic’s
court in Italy was available to all, much like the emperors’ of old, and some of
these provincials appealed directly to it.24 Yet, as Theoderic also claimed, his
“innate piety” (an imperial quality) endeavoured to “provide remedies to the
oppressed” and “take away the fatigue of a long journey”.25 Hence, agents like
Severinus and Osuin were critical to the Ostrogothic position in this double
province; they served as both administrators for and representatives of a dis-
tant regime and in the process hopefully lived up to the assertion that they
were “gifted in arms and glorious in justice”.26 Beyond these details, however,
little more can be said about Ostrogothic rule in the region.
Noricum
When and to what extent Theoderic assumed control over Noricum is a mat-
ter of some debate, as the sources are quite meagre.27 Like Dalmatia-Savia, the
earliest administrative records demonstrate an Ostrogothic claim to the region
22 Variae 5.14–15 and 9.9.
23 Variae 5.14.7: “Maiores enim nostri discursus iudicum non oneri, sed compendio provin-
cialibus esse voluerunt.”
24 For possessores, Variae 5.15; Dalmatians appealing to court, Variae 3.7, 5.24, and 8.12.
25 Variae 5.15.1–2: “ingeniosa pietate repperimus... fatigationem longi itineris abrogare...
speret remedium qualibet pressus iniuria.”
26 Variae 9.9.1: “qui sunt armis praediti et iustitia gloriosi.”
27 See Wolfram, Goths, pp. 315–16; idem, “Westillyrien”, p. 316; and Heuberger, “Rätien”,
pp. 77–82.