Читать книгу Amalasuintha - Massimiliano Vitiello - Страница 12

Chapter 2

Amalasuintha at the Palace of Ravenna

The Making of a Queen

From her youth, indeed probably from the moment of her birth, Amalasuintha had been an important part of Theoderic’s political plans. Naturally her inevitable future as the wife of a king had been clear since her childhood—we may also wonder whether Theoderic dreamed of joining her to the imperial family. But slowly it became apparent that the aging king would have no son, and that Amalasuintha should marry the successor to the Gothic throne. In his plan for her education, the king prepared his daughter to be the future queen of Italy.

Amalasuintha’s education was the foundation of her future government and the basis of her political choices. Her marriage was determined by Theoderic’s ambition to reunify the two Gothic peoples (Ostrogoths and Visigoths) under the Amal name and the government of Ravenna. And even if the Romans would ultimately have cause to regret her marriage to the Spanish Amal Eutharic, it still served to restore good relationships between Italy and the empire: Emperor Justin had adopted Eutharic per arma, and the two were consuls for the year 519. Things seemed to be moving in the right direction.

It would be Eutharic’s sudden death that threw the succession into crisis, and the final three years of Theoderic’s reign stood in stark contrast to the relative peace Italy had enjoyed for three decades. The king himself, angry and disillusioned with his Roman and imperial relationships, turned to embrace a traditional and conservative Gothic view. He was now an old man; Amalasuintha, a widow with two little children, unexpectedly became once again a central part of his plans. As he lay dying in the palace of Ravenna, Theoderic named his young grandson Athalaric as successor. Perhaps the king, in his last days, relived his disappointments of the past—including fifteen years earlier his ill-fated decision to entrust his other grandson Amalaric in Spain to his armiger. Maybe this explains why, rather than entrusting Athalaric to a member of the Gothic aristocracy, Theoderic took the unusual step of instituting the child’s own mother as regent—and likely with the title of regina.

The burden of the kingdom now rested on the shoulders of Amalasuintha. While the Goths must have looked at a female regency as an unusual decision, it would have seemed less so to Theoderic, whose own experience as a hostage in Constantinople during his youth had put him in touch with powerful female figures, such as the empress Ariadne (see Chapter 5). Not by coincidence, this woman would represent a significant model for Amalasuintha as a ruling woman and an agent in the transmission of power. And perhaps Theoderic was confident that Amalasuintha was as prepared as it was possible for her to be for such a task. After all, he himself had shaped her education on the Roman model that had so deeply informed his own reign.

Born and Raised on Italic Soil

Amalasuintha came into the world sometime between late 494 and 497.¹ She was the last daughter of Theoderic, but the only one born and raised in Italy. Her two older stepsisters, Theudigotha and Ostrogotho Areagni, were both born in Moesia to a different mother, perhaps a concubine of Theoderic or (less likely) a wife who later died.² It is possible that by the time Amalasuintha was born, her stepsisters had already left Italy and were married, Theudigotha to Alaric II, the king of the Visigoths, and Ostrogotho to Sigismund, the son of the king of the Burgundians.³ Amalasuintha was the only child that Theoderic had from Audefleda, sister of Clovis, the king of the Franks.⁴ Theoderic was almost forty years old when this marriage took place, perhaps around 493/4, during the last stage of his conquest of Italy, or at the latest in 495/6;⁵ in any case the event took place before Clovis had converted to Catholicism. Through his marriage to Audefleda, the Amal king tied his people to the Franks, thus securing an alliance with this powerful tribe in continental Europe against the Burgundians, whose kingdom lay between the Frankish and Gothic territories. Perhaps it was the Burgundians’ recent aggression against Italy that convinced Theoderic to give his daughter to Sigismund, son of their king Gundobad, in order to calm the situation; through the marriage he did achieve the release of six thousand prisoners who had been kidnapped during a raid in the north of the peninsula.⁶

Even if it was these violent political circumstances that created her parents’ marriage, as a child Amalasuintha was never immersed in the ongoing reality of wars between kingdoms. She was most likely born in the palace of Ravenna, the βασίλεια, which in earlier times had been the residence of most of the last Roman emperors, and which was later home to Odovacer. This palatium had been built in different stages during the fifth century by the emperors of the Theodosian dynasty, and Theoderic further extended and decorated it. He proudly had this building represented on the mosaic in his palace’s chapel, now the basilica of Sant’Apollinare Nuovo. As a member of the Amal family, Amalasuintha had Roman citizenship and the patrician title name of Flavia.⁷ These privileges had belonged to the family at least since 484, when Emperor Zeno appointed Theoderic consul.⁸ Indeed, the Amal family was slowly growing to resemble a dynasty in the late imperial style.

Amalasuintha belonged to the very first generation of Goths born and raised on Italic soil, and her lifestyle was one that Gothic rulers of previous generations could never have imagined. Unlike her ancestors, she never had to endure the continuous displacements, wandering, and wars that characterized the life of the Goths before they moved to Italy. In earlier times the group led by Theoderic wandered through the Balkans and Thrace, eventually settling in the provinces of Dacia Ripensis and Moesia Inferior, where they made the city of Novae their headquarters.⁹ When Theoderic finally came to Italy, according to Procopius, “he was followed by the Gothic army, who placed the women and children in their wagons and as many movable goods as they were allowed to take.” The Amal women would follow the convoy except for at the siege of Ravenna, when they remained in Ticinum.¹⁰ Ennodius with lofty words describes how the king comforted his frightened mother and sister in the rear guard before the battle of Verona.¹¹ Unlike the older women of the family, such as her grandmother Erelieva and her aunt Amalafrida, Amalasuintha never witnessed clashes between bands of warriors, hiding with women and children in the wagons of the Gothic rear guard, aware of the terrible consequences a defeat would signify.¹² She never experienced such a life of peril.

Some of the women of Amalasuintha’s family (like Amalafrida, Ostrogotho Areagni, and Amalaberga) encountered Roman culture only as hostages at the court of Constantinople or during Theoderic’s first decade in Ravenna. But this was not the case for Amalasuintha, whose father never had to send her as a hostage to the emperor or to other kings.¹³ She was the youngest child of the family, and perhaps the most privileged. Born and raised in the felicitas Italiae, she was protected under the umbrella of the civilitas, and unlike all her ancestors, she led a life distant from war. At the time of her youth, Theoderic was occupied with diplomacy, and his days were spent developing alliances with other gentes and promoting peace from his palace. His armies were led by his counts, who achieved important victories in the East at Sirmium and at Horreum Margi (504–505), and in the West, where they took Provence from the Burgundians (508).

The peaceful atmosphere of Ravenna shaped the early life of Amalasuintha and set her apart from her female ancestors. Her lifestyle at the palace resembled that of a Roman imperial woman, perhaps especially her education. This was the will of her father, on whom Roman culture had a strong impact. The ten years Theoderic spent at the Eastern court in Constantinople strongly influenced his views on government. At the age of seven or eight, his father, Theudimer, had sent him to Leo as a hostage, where he soon distinguished himself and gained the sympathy of the emperor.¹⁴ At the palace, he benefited from a literary education provided by the best masters;¹⁵ this experience turned out to be crucial in his future kingship. Later he would be granted the most important offices of the Romans: the title of master of the soldiers, the consulship, and the patriciate. Emperor Zeno, with whom he built a strong relationship, eventually gave him his blessing to remove Odovacer and administer Italy on his behalf. Years later, Ennodius would claim that Theoderic’s early time in Constantinople, the womb of civilitas, predicted his brilliant future.¹⁶ And Theoderic would remind Emperor Anastasius how his previous experience in Constantinople had been beneficial for the government of Italy. He claimed that the time he had spent at the imperial court was formative, for there he learned how to rule over the Romans with justice, and how, by imitating the empire, he could raise his kingdom above others.¹⁷

Strengthened by his experience in Constantinople, as king of Italy Theoderic ensured that grammarians and orators in Rome received their traditional tributes, and Ennodius praised him for having promoted eloquentia and veneranda studia in an obvious contrast to the treacherous times of Odovacer.¹⁸ Theoderic’s program of civilitas included the support of Roman culture. A later source reports that the king used to say: “a poor Roman plays the Goth, a rich Goth the Roman” (Romanus miser imitatur Gothum et utilis Gothus imitatur Romanum).¹⁹ Whether this is true or not, the fact is that some in his close entourage received an education in Roman style. One of these was his nephew Theodahad, who could afford the privilege of a life far from the wars. Theodahad dedicated himself to philosophy and to the study of literature and the Holy Scriptures.²⁰ And Theoderic did not deny this kind of education to the women of his household. His sister Amalaberga and some other princesses of the family, who were raised at the palace and later married to other kings, received an education in literature and manners.²¹

But it was Amalasuintha who spent about thirty years beside her father at the court of Ravenna, and it was she who benefited from an education in Roman style and experience in many ways reminiscent of Theoderic’s childhood in Constantinople.

An Education in the Roman Style

Grammatica and rhetorica stood as the foundation of the traditional education that Theoderic encouraged in his kingdom. Around the year 510, in his pamphlet known as Paraenesis Didascalica, Ennodius celebrated these two disciplines as complementary to the virtues of modesty, chastity, and faith: verecundia, castitas, fides. Intellectuals such as Augustine and Jerome had recommended the cultivation of these virtues to elite Roman ladies, considering them fundamental for the Christian education of women.²²

Ennodius’s work was intended for two of his male pupils, Ambrosius and Beatus, who asked him for advice before moving to Rome to complete their studies. Toward the end of the pamphlet, Ennodius recommended teachers for them to follow, providing a list of names: Faustus and Avienus, Festus and Symmachus, Probinus, Cethegus, Boethius, Agapitus, and Probus.²³ These were the senators of old distinguished families, who were among the most powerful politicians in Rome at the time; in his efforts to stay connected to the elite and to the cultural circles of the old capital, Ennodius corresponded with many of them. Festus, Cethegus, and Symmachus held the position of head of the Roman Senate (caput senatus). Ennodius dedicated his pamphlet to Symmachus and sent a copy to him.²⁴ The Roman aristocracy was still a vital organ for the administration of Italy and the palace of Ravenna, and Ennodius urged his students: “May the heavenly Providence join you to the obedience of all those whom I have just mentioned.”²⁵

Ennodius recommended men who were not simply teachers of literature and oratory: they were also potential patrons who could introduce their pupils to the world of the Roman aristocracy. At the same time, they were highly esteemed at the royal palace, where some of them had or would hold important offices. They could open the gates to a promising political career in both Rome and Ravenna for their protégés. This was also true of Ambrosius, who became the quaestor of Athalaric in 526/7 and the vicarius of Cassiodorus, the Praetorian prefect, in 533.²⁶

Roman aristocratic women mostly operated behind the scenes in the political world, but they were important for the cultural life of the kingdom, and some were recognized for their learning. Ennodius recommended that his students seek out the most renowned of these women and learn from them. One of them was Barbara, who hosted Beatus as well as other pupils of Ennodius in her Roman house.²⁷ Another was the woman Stephania:

Or if it pleases you to go to noble women, you will have the lady Barbara, the flower of Roman genius, who by the evidence of her face reveals the brightness of her blood and her discrimination. In her you will find the modest confidence and the confident modesty that come from good action; a speech so spiced with natural and artificial simplicity that neither does the charm of her address grow cold nor its splendor grow still in the harsh locutions of women; in whom the desire for what is right has so become second nature that even if she wanted to lie she could not commit the error. Her tongue gives the charm of chaste sweetness, nor is cloudiness of thought covered over by a veil of calm, bright speech; this is true of her heart as it is of her speech. May she pardon the one who claims for her the crown of women, which I grudge to her Silence; I should wish that imitation of that be held up as exemplar in all the parts of Italy, so that all women who do not yield to her teachings might at least be transformed by her example (velim illam omnibus Italiae partibus imitationem praeferri, ut quae non adquiescunt monitis formarentur exemplis). There is also Stephania, a most glorious light of the Catholic Church, the day of whose birth glows with a brighter light once you know her manner, much as the sun, the eye of the world, outshines a torch; and if you set aside the rays of her inborn behaviour, nothing will shine together brighter than her ancestry.²⁸

Around the same time, Ennodius sent another letter to Barbara, whom he considered a close friend, encouraging her to leave the old capital for Ravenna to accept an appointment at the court: “I assure myself and my own desires, that the accepted appointment (dignitas) calls you, with your happiness and joy to the palatine office (comitatenses excubias), which may satisfy my vows. Do not, my Lady, wish that you be exempted from this work, from this burden. Let the provinces see the goods of the city of Rome, and those [women] who are educated through teachings, may be formed by examples through those good things that God conferred upon you (velim illam omnibus Italiae partibus imitationem praeferri, ut quae non adquiescunt monitis formarentur exemplis).”²⁹ In this letter Ennodius partially repeats a concept that he also expresses in his eulogy of Barbara: an education is not just based on teaching; it finds its natural completion in examples. Barbara was an exemplum of the Roman female aristocracy. Because of her social status, her education, and her place in the cultural circles of the old capital, such a symbolic figure was certainly more than a good educator for aristocratic women.

Ennodius’s letter suggests that Barbara was summoned to the palace around 510 or shortly after.³⁰ Surely Barbara was more compatible with the Arian Gothic court than Stephania, the Roman noble lady whom Ennodius praised as “a most glorious light of the Catholic Church.” Obviously Barbara was summoned to the royal palace with a higher position than cubicularia, although she must have been intimately close to the person(s) that she was meant to care for. Assuming that she accepted the position offered to her, it is likely that she was employed to mentor elite Gothic women, and to educate them in grammar, rhetoric, and the virtues cultivated by Roman aristocratic ladies. For whom was she brought to Ravenna? We know that Amalafrida had left Ravenna in 500, while Amalaberga departed around 510–511.³¹ The most likely candidate is therefore Amalasuintha, who in that year lived at the palace and was also of an age not unsuitable for her to have a tutor.

Like all the other imperial and royal family members, including Athalaric, Amalasuintha must have had many teachers, probably males as well as females, in her broad education. Though we do not have direct evidence of her curriculum or her tutors, her high level of education is clear from later documents. The Amal princess had been ruling beside her son for eight years when Cassiodorus in a letter-panegyric addressed to the Roman senators praised her intellectual qualities. His long eulogy included, but was not limited to, her knowledge of three languages, Gothic, Latin, and Greek, and of literature:

For every realm most properly reveres her. To behold her inspires awe; to hear her discourse, wonder. In what tongue is not her learning proven? She is fluent in the splendour of Greek oratory; she shines in the glory of Roman eloquence; the flow of her ancestral speech brings her glory; she surpasses all in their own languages, and is equally wonderful in each. For if it is the part of a wise person to be well acquainted with his native tongue, how should we value the wisdom which retains and faultlessly practices so many kinds of eloquence? Hence, the different races have a great and necessary safeguard, since no one needs an interpreter when addressing the ears of our wise mistress. For the envoy suffers no delay, and the appellant no damage from the slowness of his translator, since each is heard in his own words, and is answered in the speech of his nation. To this is added, as it were a glorious diadem, the priceless knowledge of literature, through which she learns the wisdom of the ancients, and the royal dignity is constantly increased.³²

Her fluency in languages was beneficial for diplomacy. Amalasuintha had no need of a translator when she received foreign dignitaries.³³ Though it is not specified, she may have been able to understand the Frankish language of her mother, who, like Amalafrida in Africa, probably came to Italy accompanied by an entourage of bodyguards, attendants, and palace women.³⁴ The passage above seems to consider Gothic as a sort of lingua franca among peoples of East Germanic stock—the circulation of the Wulfila Bible may also testify in this direction.³⁵ Though Greek was no longer widely known in the West (Theodahad himself does not seem to have known Greek, despite his education in Platonic philosophy),³⁶ it retained a prominent place in the education of elites, and it was desirable for rulers to know it. Theoderic learned Greek in Constantinople and used it in diplomatic relations with the emperors during his more than thirty years in the East, and later as king of Italy. He likely made sure that his daughter learned the language of the emperors. Cassiodorus’s claim about Amalasuintha’s knowledge of Greek oratory also fits with the queen’s strong interest in the imperial and Byzantine models that I explore in Chapter 5.

Amalasuintha’s skill in languages was accompanied by composure, discretion, diplomacy, and other virtues, one of them being restraint. She was a wise ruler, capable of handling the secrets of the palace: “But, although she rejoices in such linguistic perfection, she is so silent in public business (in actu publico sic tacita est) that you would think her indolent. She unties the knots of litigation by a few words; she quietly calms heated conflicts; she acts in silence for the public good (silentiose geritur publicum bonum). You do not hear proclaimed the measures which are openly adopted; and, with wonderful restraint (temperamento mirabili), she transacts by stealth what she knows must be done in haste.”³⁷ These are the same praises that Cassiodorus repeats one year later when eulogizing Amalasuintha in the name of Theodahad:

Who could sufficiently explain with such piety, such authority of customs she is adorned? … She is acute in examining problems, but she is authoritative and extremely measured in her speech (ad loquendum summa moderatione gravissima). With no doubt this is a royal virtue: to think more quickly what is necessary, and more slowly, to break out in words. Indeed, one does not know how to say regrettable things, who entrusts to his own examination the things that he will later declare publicly. Hence it is that her admirable learning is expanded through the large richness of the knowledge of multiple languages of her, whose intellect is found so prepared even at a moment’s notice, that it does not seem mortal…. In a few words an immense meaning is encompassed, and with great ease is formulated what is not expressed even through a long reflection. Happy is the State that is glorified by the government of such a ruler.³⁸

Among her many virtues, Cassiodorus acknowledges Amalasuintha’s gravitas, and also her moderatio, a quality that he also attributes to Empress Theodora.³⁹ All these virtues were necessary for those closest to the king, as the Roman and the Gothic courtiers Cyprianus and Tuluin had been to Theoderic.⁴⁰ For rulers, these qualities were not just desirable, they were indispensable; and both panegyrists and historians highlighted them. Sidonius Apollinaris attributed them to the Visigothic king Theoderic II: “Meanwhile deputations from various people are introduced, and he listens to a great deal of talk, but replies briefly, postponing business which he intends to consider, speeding that which is to be promptly settled.”⁴¹ Jordanes, abridging Cassiodorus, described King Walamer as “a good keeper of secrets, bland of speech and skilled in wiles.”⁴² And, to quote a closer example, in Ennodius’s praises of Theoderic we read: “Without speaking, his expression is enough alone to promise the ambassadors either a beautiful peace, if it is calm, or a war, if it is frightful. So many qualities are encompassed in you that—if they were distributed one to every man—it would be enough to make everyone perfect.”⁴³ The language used to praise Amalasuintha as regent is the same language used to praise other acknowledged rulers, both male and female. The virtues of a good ruler that Amalasuintha embodied in her public persona were the ideal result of the model of female education for Roman elite women. Ennodius emphasized them in his eulogy of Barbara, when he praised her simplicity and clarity of speech.⁴⁴ About sixty years later, Gregory of Tours would attribute similar qualities to Brunhild as wife of Sigibert: “virtuous and well-behaved, wise in her advice and pleasant in her address.”⁴⁵

The Roman education and lifestyle that Theoderic promoted at his court in Ravenna strongly influenced Amalasuintha’s political activity. Fundamentally pro-Roman herself, Amalasuintha also placed great store in the Roman educational model and chose it for her son. Procopius tells us that she attempted to educate Athalaric as a Roman prince by having him schooled by a grammarian and surrounding him with wise elders. He suggests that the conservative Goths at the palace opposed her plans.⁴⁶ That she did in fact desire a Roman education for her son seems even more likely when we consider that she gave exactly that kind of education to her daughter, Matasuintha. A fragment of a Cassiodoran panegyric from 537 celebrating Queen Matasuintha suggests her education in the Roman model:

Therefore gather here, O most honorable sisters, in the chambers of the court; come here accompanied by the supreme beauty that can adorn you. First let divine chastity (castitas) train the brow, then rosy modesty (verecundia) color the cheeks, moderate temperance (temperantia) cheer up the look of the bright eyes, gentle pity (pietas) rule over the noble heart, honored wisdom (sapientia) bestow speech to the tongue (sermonem linguae), quiet modesty (modestia) compose god-fearing (religiosos) steps. Such a cortege of deference deserves to have she, who could be discovered the descendant of so many kings.⁴⁷

The virtues that are emphasized here mirror far more than the model of education eulogized by Ennodius in his pamphlet. They recur in panegyrical literature, but they also accord with those virtues of the Christian model of education that Pelagius, Augustine, and Jerome had recommended a century earlier to the women of the Anician family.⁴⁸ From Roman circles, the study of grammar and the cultivation of Christian virtues penetrated the palace of Ravenna; here they became part of the culture of those few wealthy Goths who benefited from the privilege of a Romanized education.

While ruling for Athalaric, Amalasuintha not only endeavored to give her children a Roman education, she also guaranteed that the schools of the old capital received support. In late 533 she ensured payments to the Roman teachers, who had not been regularly remunerated. The letter is in Athalaric’s name but, as in other cases, it represents Amalasuintha’s will, and it clearly expresses her thoughts:

Now recently … I came to know by discreet report from various people, that the teachers of eloquence at Rome are not receiving the constituted rewards for their labours, and that the trafficking of certain men has caused the sums assigned to the masters of the schools to be diminished…. For the school of grammar has primacy: it is the fairest foundation of learning, the glorious mother of eloquence…. Grammar is the mistress of words, the embellisher of the human race; through the practice of the noble reading of ancient authors, she helps us, we know, by her counsels…. Therefore, fathers of the Senate, with God’s approval, I enjoin on you this duty, this authority: a succeeding professor in the school of liberal studies, whether the grammarian, the rhetorician, or the teacher of law, shall receive from those responsible, without any diminution, the income of his predecessor…. For, if I bestow my wealth on actors for the pleasure of the people, and men who are not thought so essential are meticulously paid, how much more should payment be made without delay to those through whom good morals are advanced, and the talent of eloquence is nurtured to serve my palace!⁴⁹

This letter reflects those views about education that Amalasuintha shared with Theoderic. After all, it was Theoderic who had guaranteed these subsidies, and Amalasuintha here followed in the footsteps of her father, who had regularly supported grammatici, oratores, medici, and iurisperiti.⁵⁰ The enthusiastic tone with which grammatica and rhetorica are exalted is reminiscent of Ennodius’s eulogy of higher education. Amalasuintha had experienced at first hand the importance of grammar and oratory for the palace. The schools of Rome incubated the younger generation, and the most skilled youths educated in Rome and in a few other places would later be summoned to the court to take up the most important appointments in the administration and palatine bureaucracy. Roman education distinguished the kingdom of Italy from the kingdoms of the other peoples, and Theoderic made this a point upon which to claim his supremacy.⁵¹

When in late 534 Amalasuintha raised Theodahad to the throne, she did so with another reference to Roman culture, celebrating her cousin for his Platonic virtues and for his knowledge of literature.⁵² This was not entirely a lie, considering Theodahad’s interest in philosophy; in Cassiodorus’s words, he was nourished at the breast of Rome.⁵³ Such a representation was also in line with Amalasuintha’s wish to commemorate her father as a purple-clad philosopher in late 533: “To the master of the state, you [i.e., Cassiodorus] acted as a household judge, and a private courtier. For, when free from public business, he asked you to recount the opinions of the wise, so that he might compare his own deeds with those of antiquity. The courses of the stars, the gulfs of the sea, the marvels of springs were investigated by this shrewd enquirer, so that, by diligent scrutiny of the natural world, he might seem a kind of purple-clad philosopher (purpuratus philosophus).”⁵⁴ This image of Theoderic reflected Amalasuintha’s ideals, and perhaps also her wishes for Athalaric; but it was Amalasuintha herself whom Cassiodorus represented as the one whose firmness of mind “surpasses even the most famous philosophers,” because “from her mouth issue words of goodwill, and promises that can be trusted.”⁵⁵ The Platonic Theodahad would celebrate her as model for the philosophers: “Certainly the philosophers would really learn new things, if they saw [her] and if they would acknowledge how much more inferior are the contents of their books, to the things they could understand [that are] ascribed to her.”⁵⁶

Returning to the question of Amalasuintha’s youth and education, we should consider the circumstances under which Barbara was summoned to the palace, probably as a mentor, around 510. This choice took place at a troubled moment for the dynasty. Audefleda was probably alive in 506/7, when Ennodius in his panegyric warmly wished that Theoderic would receive a male heir soon, a sacer parvolus who would play on his lap.⁵⁷ But it seems likely that the queen died shortly afterward. There is no reference to her in the Variae (the earliest of which date to circa 507), and she probably died shortly after 508. This is speculative, because Audefleda’s death is not recorded by any of our authors, and we do not know how she died. We have only the story of Gregory of Tours, who claims that Amalasuintha killed her own mother, but we have no reason to seriously entertain his version (particularly since he claims that all this happened after the death of Theoderic!).⁵⁸ But what we do know is that in 510 Theoderic was in his late fifties and still without a direct heir. It is reasonable to think that at this point the king, who after he was widowed never remarried, had given up the idea of a son, and that he changed his strategy for a successor.

While Theoderic was searching for the right husband for his daughter, Amalasuintha was at a formative age. At this point Theoderic probably did not have a precise plan about how to regulate his succession. But Amalasuintha was now the best candidate to be the future queen of Italy and to govern over the Romans (especially considering the reservations that Theoderic had about Theodahad, which I discuss later). An education was not just desirable; it was indispensable for Theoderic’s daughter. Barbara belonged to the crème de la crème of the female aristocracy of the old capital, and given her political and cultural connections with the senatorial environment, she was the ideal figure to bring to the palace. Not only was she an exemplary instructor of grammar and of manners (as Ennodius claims), she was also the right person to prepare Amalasuintha for the female world of power, including politics and diplomacy.

Amalasuintha benefited from a much higher level of education than Amalafrida and Amalaberga, whose instruction, as I discuss later, was functional to the queenship and who were trained to offer their husbands wisdom and advice.⁵⁹ For Amalasuintha, Roman culture had become a necessity for her future role in the government. Indeed, after his Frankish wife died, Theoderic had to rely on her, his only still-unmarried daughter, in order to provide Italy with an Amal heir. Now more than ever, Amalasuintha had become her father’s biggest treasure.

Promising Unions: Amalasuintha’s Marriage and Theoderic’s Dreams

By the time Amalasuintha was nearing the age of twenty, she was the only legitimate child of Theoderic living in Italy, and also the only daughter who had not yet been given in marriage. In order to guarantee succession to his throne, Theoderic could not let her leave Italy to marry another king. He needed to keep her close to him. Theoretically, he could have arranged a marriage with a scion of one of the Gothic aristocratic families in Ravenna, or perhaps with his own nephew Theodahad, who was an Amal. But for a series of dynastic and expansionistic reasons, Theoderic never embraced these options, nor did he seriously consider Theodahad.⁶⁰ Rather, he searched for Amalasuintha’s husband outside his palace and even outside Italy.

While evaluating the various options, he “discovered” a branch of the Amal family in Visigothic Spain. We read in Jordanes that Theoderic learned that Eutharic Cilliga was living in the kingdom of Amalaric. Apparently an Amal of Spain, he was the son of Veteric, the grandson of the Amal Beremud and the great-grandson of Thorismuth.⁶¹ No matter whether this suspicious Amal ancestry was real, or whether it was made up by Theoderic for dynastic reasons, this kinship could guarantee the continuation of the Amal dynasty in Italy, while facilitating acceptance of an external heir by the emperor and also by the Goths. The propaganda on this ancestry was strong to the point that Cassiodorus would celebrate Thorismuth and his father Hunimund as Amalasuintha’s direct ancestors in his letter-panegyric—probably drawing on his Gothic History.⁶²

The arrangements Theoderic made for Amalasuintha’s betrothal were very unlike those he had made previously for his other daughters. Instead of sending Amalasuintha to Spain, in 515 Theoderic invited her chosen spouse to come to Italy: “[Theoderic] sent for him and gave him his daughter Amalasuintha in marriage,” writes Jordanes.⁶³ Cassiodorus listed this event in his Chronicle,⁶⁴ and he eulogized Eutharic in his lost History as an Amal descendant in possession of the qualities necessary for a military leader and a Gothic king. Jordanes relied upon this History when he wrote of these needed qualities in his Getica: “a descendant of the race of the Amals (Amalorum) … a young man strong (pollentem) in wisdom (prudentia) and valor (virtute) and health of body.”⁶⁵ Cassiodorus would later use this same combination of qualities to celebrate Theodahad as the ideal ruler for both Romans and Goths: “I have had many wise men (prudentes viros), but none of such might (pollentem) in learning and piety. I love the Amal (Hamalum) … the brave man (virum fortem) … dear to the Romans for his wisdom (prudentia), revered for his valor (gentibus virtute) by the tribes.”⁶⁶ According to this (Cassiodoran) representation, Amal heritage combined with prudentia et virtus was the formula for rule over the Romans and Goths. This was an important aspect of the propaganda of the kingdom, and in a letter in Theoderic’s name dating years earlier we read about the Goths: “They have always maintained a praiseworthy mean, since they have acquired the wisdom of the Romans (Romanorum prudentia), and have inherited the valor of the peoples (virtutem gentium).”⁶⁷

Because of the lineage of both Amalaric and Eutharic, Theoderic’s relationship with Visigothic Spain had become stronger. Jordanes, revealing once again the perspective of Cassiodorus’s lost work, makes clear how great Theoderic’s expectations were of this marriage: “Eutharic married Amalasuintha, the daughter of Theoderic, thus uniting again the stock of the Amals which had divided long ago.”⁶⁸ Theoderic was probably planning to put an end to the generational division of the two Gothic peoples, Ostrogoths and Visigoths. Indeed, Amalaric, the son of Theudigotha and orphan of his father Alaric II since 507, was too young to rule when in 511 he succeeded to the Visigothic throne.

The political scenario behind this event is particularly complex. The battle of Vouillé (near Poitiers) in the late summer of 507 brought the death of Alaric II, and his throne was seized by his illegitimate son, Gesalic. In addition, the Visigothic kingdom lost the regions of Toulouse and Aquitaine, which became part of Clovis’s territory. One year later Theoderic took Provence from the Burgundians. The king was concerned at the increasing power of the Franks,⁶⁹ and he was also worried about the support that Anastasius was giving to this Catholic tribe. In fact, in 507/8 the emperor attempted to damage the Ostrogothic kingdom by raiding the southern Italian coast with his fleet, and in 508 he granted extraordinary honors to Clovis.⁷⁰ Theoderic’s reaction was resolute: he strengthened his friendship with the Thuringians, who were enemies of the Franks, by marrying his niece Amalaberga to their king, Herminafrid (510/11). In addition, in 511 he intervened in Spain, where he overthrew Gesalic in favor of his grandchild Amalaric.⁷¹ This action proved to be fundamental, and Theoderic counted this year as the beginning of his rule over Spain as tutor for Amalaric.⁷²

Theoderic had created an opening for a reunification under the Amal crown of the two Gothic peoples, who had been divided for almost a century and a half; it is not a coincidence that in his lost History Cassiodorus counted 511 as the two-thousandth year of Gothic history.⁷³ Amalasuintha’s marriage to a highly ranked member of the Gothic nobility in Spain facilitated the process for the reunification of the two Gothic peoples. Importantly, this happened in Italy and under the Amal name; and it is not a coincidence that in sections of the Getica deriving from Cassiodorus, the nobility of the Balths is secondary to that of the Amals.⁷⁴

In the meantime, to facilitate his control over Spain, Theoderic had entrusted Amalaric to the guardianship of Theudis, who was his armiger. It does not seem coincidental that Theudis was sent to Spain at the same time as Eutharic came to Italy, and it is possible that among Theudis’s duties was to keep Amalaric under control.⁷⁵ The examples of the Ostrogoth Theudis in Spain and the Amal Eutharic in Italy suggest that Theoderic had planned the reunification in the interest of his people, in particular of the Amal family. Had his plan worked, the result could have been the control of the entire northwestern Mediterranean world under the same ruler, with its center in Italy: Spain and southern Gaul, Raetia, Noricum, and the western part of Illyricum, including Dalmatia and Pannonia. A reunification of Ostrogoths and Visigoths could further develop into an expansion over the former Western Roman Empire, including the territories of the Vandals and the Burgundians, and also the area between the Rhine and the Danube.⁷⁶ And the Franks as well as the empire would feel the pressure of this strong Gothic coalition. Simply said, the marriage of Eutharic and Amalasuintha offered far more than a guarantee of succession; it laid the foundation for a glorious political scenario in which the Amal family’s power would be dramatically extended.

Jordanes claimed that Eutharic was young, but Cassiodorus’s remark that Eutharic was “almost equal in age” to Justin means that he was the same age as both the emperor and Theoderic (both were born in the 450s).⁷⁷ I wonder, together with Wood, whether Eutharic was really meant to be Theoderic’s heir, or just the father of a Gothic successor.⁷⁸ Perhaps Theoderic hoped at that time to live long enough to leave his realm to his yet-unborn grandson, as Emperor Leo, his former friend in the East, had tried unsuccessfully to do with his little grandchild Leo II (the son of his daughter Ariadne and Zeno, the emperor who would later support Theoderic).

The long-awaited heir finally came the year after the wedding. In 516 Athalaric—(aþal + *rika) “the noble king” or “the one who had power over the nobles”—was born as the first child of the new royal couple, to the great joy of Theoderic. The appropriate name for the son of Amalasuintha and Eutharic would have probably been Amalaric: the “powerful Amal.” But this name had already been given, probably for strategic reasons, to Theoderic’s Visigothic grandson, born in 502 but not yet king and still under Theoderic’s tutorship.⁷⁹ Shortly afterward, around 518, followed the birth of a girl, Matasuintha.⁸⁰ By this point Theoderic had two more royal grandsons in Amalaric and Sigeric, the children of his two daughters Theudigotha and Ostrogotho Areagni.⁸¹ Both of them were heirs to the thrones in their countries, respectively Visigothic Spain and the Burgundian kingdom. Theoderic’s farsighted matrimonial policy was bearing fruit, insofar as his alliances had generated heirs with roots in the Amal family. And even if, paradoxically, his own kingdom was still lacking an adult descendant, things seemed finally to have taken the desired turn in Italy too.

As the wife of the Amal of Spain and as the mother of Theoderic’s long-awaited Italic heir, Amalasuintha had fully stepped into her father’s succession plan as the future queen of Italy—and perhaps even of an Ostrogothic-Visigothic unified kingdom.

The Collapse of Theoderic’s Best-Laid Plans

Theoderic was striving to endear his Spanish son-in-law to both the Gothic aristocracy and the Romans, in an effort to prepare him for eventual succession or guardianship in the event that Theoderic died before Athalaric reached the age of majority. He began pushing Justin for an acknowledgment of the heir, and he succeeded in having Eutharic adopted per arma by the emperor. This was the honor that Theoderic himself had received from Zeno forty years earlier. The adoption of Eutharic satisfied a common “desire for concord”⁸² at the same time as the thirty-five-year religious conflict between Italy and the empire, the Acacian Schism, was coming to an end. Eutharic was also granted Roman citizenship, the title of vir clarissimus, and the name of Flavius, the royal honors of the Amal family to which he belonged.⁸³ In 518 Justin gave his consent to the most prestigious honor of the consulship,⁸⁴ and he himself stood as consul together with Eutharic, so that both their names were permanently tied in the Fasti Consulares as the Eastern and Western consuls of the year 519.⁸⁵ All these were important privileges, considering that the consulship previously granted by Anastasius to King Clovis was only an honorary one.

Here we encounter an interesting but obscure area that is worthy of a short digression. We know that Emperor Anastasius had granted the patrician title to Clovis as well in 508, soon after the battle of Vouillé.⁸⁶ Ten years later, shortly before he died, the emperor also raised the Burgundian Sigismund to patrician rank, and this king may have held the place of master of the soldiers per Gallias in the name of the emperor.⁸⁷ These were not isolated cases. Previous emperors had granted the patriciate to barbarian kings in their wish to consolidate alliances: Anthemius to the Burgundian king Chilperic II in 468, Olybrius to Gundobad in 472–474, Zeno to Theoderic; even Odovacer may have obtained the patriciate from Zeno.⁸⁸ But now that Anastasius had passed away and Justin was on the throne, the Burgundian king, who felt squeezed between the two Gothic kingdoms and the Franks, was probably unhappy with the events unfolding between Italy and Spain, and Ravenna and Constantinople. An inscription from this kingdom dating to 519 does not include Eutharic’s consulship.⁸⁹ “In a world where Roman title counted,” writes Wood, “one might wonder whether Eutharic’s consulship was specifically intended by Theoderic to trump Sigismund’s position as magister militum, granted by the emperor three years earlier.”⁹⁰ The subsequent murder in 522 by Sigismund of his own son, who was no less than Theoderic’s grandson, could be a symptom of this tension.⁹¹

Eutharic’s consulship was such an extraordinary event that it was celebrated in great style in both capitals of the kingdom. To honor the special occasion, Eutharic commissioned Cassiodorus to write the Chronicle. Cassiodorus did so, chronicling Roman history from the foundation of the city to Eutharic’s consulship and the royal marriage, and he dedicated this work to the new prince.⁹² In addition, on the same occasion he proclaimed a panegyric before the senators. Only a few fragments remain of this work, which the author called to mind years later in a letter addressed to the Roman Senate for his promotion to the Praetorian prefecture: “Furthermore, with what loyal eloquence did he proclaim the father of my clemency [Eutharic] in the very Senate-House of Liberty! You remember how that noble orator extolled his deeds, showing his virtues to be more wonderful than his honors. I can prove my words to the hilt.”⁹³ In this letter of 533, Cassiodorus, writing in the name of Athalaric, praises his own accomplishments at the court. But it was Amalasuintha who had elevated him to Praetorian prefect, and Cassiodorus acknowledged this in his letter-panegyric of the same year.⁹⁴ It is not unlikely that Amalasuintha was part of the audience that witnessed Cassiodorus’s eulogies in the Senate House. Athalaric at that time was barely three years old, and Amalasuintha may well have accompanied her husband to Rome, where she spent at least part of the year 519, on perhaps her second visit to the old capital—in 500, when she was a little child, Theoderic had sojourned in Rome for almost six months, and apparently his sister Amalafrida was also there.⁹⁵

Cassiodorus saw that the Romans were expecting with great enthusiasm the arrival of Prince Eutharic for the celebrations of his consulship.⁹⁶ On 1 January 519, donations of different kinds and concessions of honors followed, together with games in a magnificent style:

In this year Rome saw many marvels in individual exhibitions, even Symmachus, the legate from the East, was amazed at the riches granted to Goths and Romans. He [Eutharic] gave honours to the Senate. In shows in the amphitheatres he displayed wild beasts of various sorts which the present age marveled at for their novelty. And for his spectacles, Africa in its devotion sent over the choicest of delights as well. And so, everywhere was filled with his high praise, and he was so firmly fixed in such a great love of the Roman citizens that when he returned to the sight of his glorious father at Ravenna, they still desired his presence. And there, with the exhibitions repeated, he showered such great gifts on Goths and Romans that he alone was able to surpass the consulship which he had celebrated at Rome.⁹⁷

The Eastern legate Symmachus was not the only envoy of Justin who attended the ceremony. For another legate, Gratus, had arrived in Rome on 20 December 518, carrying to the pope some letters in the name of the emperor about the unity of the churches.⁹⁸ All these events together must have given the impression that Theoderic’s golden rule over Italy had been renewed. The exotic animals, which astonished the Romans, and the delights sent from Africa were likely the presents of Theoderic’s sister Amalafrida and her husband Thrasamund to honor this event. These gifts also had a political significance for both kingdoms, considering that the relationship between Gothic Italy and Vandal Africa had recently undergone a period of turbulence (discussed in the next section). The processus consularis, in its customary form as a triumphal parade, was part of the celebrations, which included donations by the new consul entering the office: all this was exceptionally repeated in Ravenna in the presence of Theoderic.⁹⁹

The whole series of auspicious events, first and foremost the addition to the Amal family of two children, including a male heir, must have signified happy days not only for Theoderic and Amalasuintha but for the whole kingdom. Her Roman education combined with her long experience at the palace at her father’s side had made of Amalasuintha a well-trained future queen of Italy. The learned Amal princess was now supporting her Spanish husband with advice, as her royal position required.¹⁰⁰

From the evidence it is clear that Theoderic, through far-sighted, attentive diplomacy, was working to have Eutharic granted those privileges that many years earlier he himself had received in Constantinople, on the basis of which he had claimed his legitimacy to rule Italy. Eutharic was the only Goth in Italy who ever obtained the consulship; he was following in the footsteps of his father-in-law. These honors strengthened his position juridically, and he was the named heir.¹⁰¹ If Theoderic died before his grandson reached majority, he wanted his son-in-law to be equipped with the same claims that he himself had used to assert power over Italy: as ruler of the Gothic army and as a patrician with an imperial mandate. The legitimation of Eutharic was nearly complete, and Cassiodorus in his panegyric may have addressed the new prince as a sort of coregent of Theoderic, recommending that he follow his father-in-law’s advice.¹⁰² He also addressed him as dominus noster and vir gloriosus, perhaps signifying that he, like many other senators, became vir illustris and patrician soon after receiving his consulship.¹⁰³ But whether he had obtained patrician rank is uncertain. Theoderic’s plan was likely that his son-in-law would take care of the kingdom of Italy for the young Athalaric, acting as the representative of the emperor as vice patrician in the West.

Eutharic’s noble origins and his military qualities (he may have played a role in an expedition in Gaul)¹⁰⁴ mirrored the ambitions of Theoderic and made him acceptable to the Ostrogothic aristocracy. Roman titles and Theoderic’s support were not enough, however, to transform this Spanish Goth into the ruler the kingdom needed. Italy was by far the most complex portion of the former Western Empire, and ruling over it involved far more than simply guaranteeing justice between Romans and Goths, and peace between Catholics and Arians. Italy was a country of cities, most of which were still populated, and it was of particular importance to the emperor. Italy also meant Rome, the old capital that hosted a thousand-year-old Senate and the church, both of which were products of a history of power struggle and internal conflict, and these were anything but peripheral in the kingdom. Since his arrival in Italy, Theoderic himself had had to face a host of issues that were particularly Roman and Italian; the Laurentian schism in 498–500 was just one of many.

The lack of experience Eutharic had in ruling over such a complex world was clear from the beginning. His representation as a man embodying wisdom, his expensive games and the triumphal ceremonies for his entrance in the consulship, his granting of honours to Roman senators: all these were strategic moves devised by Theoderic to endear him to the Romans, and Cassiodorus had praised them accordingly. But this was not enough to allow Eutharic to conquer the hearts of the Romans. His image would soon be compromised in that same year, 519, or early in 520,¹⁰⁵ when he was involved in ending a riot in Ravenna. Our only account of this episode comes from a later anonymous author, who, describing the events of the 520s, expresses a hostile view of Theoderic, representing him as a tyrant and a persecutor of the Catholics.¹⁰⁶ The Catholics of the capital had attacked the Jewish community, accusing them of disrespecting Catholic rituals, and had burned the synagogues.¹⁰⁷ Situations like these were not unusual in Italy, but they required a degree of experience and refined political skill.¹⁰⁸ On this particular occasion, the angry Roman Catholics of Ravenna did not show any respect for the king, or Eutharic, or Peter, the bishop of the capital.¹⁰⁹ Theoderic was in Verona at the time, dealing with threats of an external attack, probably by the Franks.¹¹⁰ A group of Jews came to him as a delegation to report the events in Ravenna. They met Triwila, Theoderic’s “provost of the sacred bedchamber” (praepositus sacri cubiculi), who soon brought word of the Jews’ plight to the king’s attention.¹¹¹ Theoderic ordered Eutharic to intervene, proclaiming “the whole Roman population should furnish money for the rebuilding of the synagogues of Ravenna which had been burned; and that those who did not have anything to give should be whipped through the streets of the city while a herald made a proclamation of their offence.”¹¹² Theoderic’s order was followed, and the punishments prescribed by his Edict concerning arson were duly applied.¹¹³

Though Eutharic’s actions were ordered by Theoderic, the events in Ravenna were enough to compromise his image as prince and heir to the throne in the eyes of the Romans and the clergy. Although he had been at the palace for only a brief time, Eutharic was already labelled as “an excessively rough man, and an enemy to the Catholic faith.”¹¹⁴ We may wonder whether a few years later, when Cassiodorus introduced Athalaric as king, his words recalled the previous misunderstandings between the Romans and his father, who was intended to be a “foreign heir”: “If a foreign heir of the kingdom had overtaken you, you could perhaps doubt whether the follower out of jealousy would not love those people whom the previous [king] had loved.”¹¹⁵ Of course, this statement may also apply to the other potential heirs among Theoderic’s grandchildren, such as Amalaric.

The effect of these events on the image of the Amal house may have had their legacy in the representation of Amalasuintha by Gregory of Tours. His fabricated account can hardly be considered historical evidence: Amalasuintha did not disobey Theoderic when he (rather than Audefleda) arranged her marriage with a person “of equal rank with herself from a royal family.”¹¹⁶ It is interesting, however, that Gregory describes the daughter of Theoderic as an Arian heretic who escaped to another town with her lover, a servus named Traguila. This person should likely be identified with the above-mentioned Triwila, the king’s provost of the sacred bedchamber, who followed him to Verona; his position allowed him an intimacy with the royal family that could have prompted Gregory’s accusation of an affair with the king’s daughter.¹¹⁷ Since both Triwila, Amalasuintha’s alleged lover, and Eutharic, her husband, played the most important roles in the punishment of the Christians of Ravenna, we may wonder whether this story cemented the image of Amalasuintha as an anti-Catholic par excellence in the tradition of Gregory of Tours.¹¹⁸

Shortly after the events at Ravenna, sometime between 522 and 523, Eutharic died of causes that are unknown to us. Strangely, none of our authors thought that the event was worthy of report; Jordanes and Procopius briefly mention his death, but only in retrospect and while referring to later events. Cassiodorus in the History of the Goths, which he completed about a decade later, may even have been silent on this event, whose impact on the Amal family was bad.¹¹⁹ Eutharic’s death may have been a relief to many Roman Catholics, but it plunged the Gothic court into chaos. The ambitious plans Theoderic cherished for his son-in-law had collapsed, and his goal of integrating the two Gothic peoples was lost.¹²⁰ The king was by now almost seventy years old, and once again without an adult heir. His thirty years of planning to ensure a successor to the throne had resulted in a widow with a five-year-old boy and a three-year-old girl.

Theoderic now had to change his strategy again. He decided to rely once more, and this time in an even stronger way, on his daughter Amalasuintha. Whether or not she already held the title of regina formally, he now opened the gates of royal power to her. Over the years Amalasuintha had gained political experience and developed the capacity to rule. Living beside her father in the stimulating court environment of Ravenna, and through her seven-year marriage to the designated heir of the kingdom, she had silently entered the world of politics and diplomacy. Her enviable level of education and her experience at the palace had made her a bicultural figure: she was both Gothic and Roman in her way of thought and action. The combination of these elements made her, though a woman, a candidate uniquely suited to a position of power that was new to the Gothic world.

Tragedies and Tension at the Palace

In the three or four years that separate the death of Eutharic from that of Theoderic, Ostrogothic Italy experienced a dramatic decline after thirty years of political and diplomatic success.¹²¹ Most of the matrimonial alliances and diplomacy which Theoderic had built since the late 480s/early 490s, and which had made his kingdom a protagonist in continental Europe and in the western Mediterranean world, were compromised within a short period. The disappearance at the moment of Eutharic’s death (ca. 522) of Theoderic’s long-held plans to unify the two Gothic peoples was only the beginning.

In 522, Theoderic’s grandson Sigeric was assassinated by order of his own father, Sigismund, as Gregory of Tours and Marius of Avenches relate.¹²² The Catholic Burgundian king was trying to establish an alliance with Justin against the Goths and the Franks. His Amal wife, Theoderic’s daughter Ostrogotho Areagni, had died some time earlier, and he was now remarried with two children.¹²³ According to Gregory of Tours, it was Sigismund’s new wife who encouraged him to murder his own child by claiming that Sigeric was planning to remove him and ultimately to expand his kingdom into Italy.¹²⁴ Of course, Gregory’s tales are often fantastical, and it is difficult if not sometimes impossible to separate fact from fiction in his account. But if any thread of truth runs through the lines of this story, we may wonder whether Sigeric was at this point Theoderic’s backup plan for succession, and whether in 523, when the Amal king sent his army with the Goth Tuluin on an expedition against the Burgundians, one of Theoderic’s intentions was vengeance for the murder of his grandson.¹²⁵ Tuluin seems to have fought against Sigismund on the side of the Franks of Chlodomer in order to protect the interest of the Gothic kingdom. However, Chlodomer’s expedition ended with its defeat in 524 at Vézeronce, where the king died.

On 6 May 523 the Vandal king Thrasamund also died. His successor, Hilderic, who was none other than the son of Eudocia and grandson of Valentinian III, restored Catholicism in Africa, which until then had been persecuted. After the death in 511 of Gesalic, who had sought help from the Vandals, the increasing power of Theoderic over Visigothic Spain may have started a process of deterioration of the relationships between the Vandal and the Ostrogothic kingdoms.¹²⁶ As soon as Thrasamund died, Amalafrida was no longer a guarantee of good relationships between Italy and Africa. The queen escaped to Capsa, where she tried to get help from the Moors, enemies of the Vandals who in previous years had defeated Thrasamund.¹²⁷ Under the pretext that she and the Goths around her were conspiring against the new kingdom, Hilderic massacred her following of noble Goths and imprisoned the queen; she died sometime in 526.¹²⁸ This horrible, unexpected news must have brought Theoderic close to panic. For strategic reasons he decided not to start a war against the Vandals, but he did order the building of a fleet.¹²⁹ This may have upset both the empire and the Vandals, who were at this point on good terms with each other, though they failed to intimidate Theoderic: “The Greeks do not have any reason to argue with us, nor the Africans to despise us.”¹³⁰ It was because of his initial intention to face the Vandals, or perhaps to contain the threat of the Franks, that Theoderic in 525/6 ordered his Praetorian prefect, Abundantius, to provide supplies and ships for the archers led by the saio Tata, who had been sent to reinforce the Gothic army commanded by Count Wiliarius.¹³¹ Only shortly afterward, at the beginning of Athalaric’s reign, Cassiodorus received a military command for the protection of the coasts.¹³²

In Spain things were not going well either. Theoderic’s other grandson, Amalaric, was still under the guardianship of Theudis, who over the years had increased his level of power to the point that he was practically ruling himself, against Theoderic’s will.¹³³ The dream of a reunification of the two Gothic peoples was now over, and Theoderic was progressively losing control over the Visigothic kingdom.

While the situation in external politics was becoming more and more bleak, things in Italy took an even more complicated turn shortly after Eutharic’s death. Radical changes in the Mediterranean and European political landscape, together with the death of the presumptive heir to the kingdom, may have given Justin a pretext to reconsider his approval of Theoderic’s succession; supporting a new heir may have not been in Justin’s plans. We know that in 524–525 two men from two of the most illustrious families of Rome, Boethius and his father-in-law, Symmachus, were executed. These men had reached the peak of their prestige in 522, when the two sons of Boethius became consuls.¹³⁴ As was traditional, the event was celebrated with circus games and triumphal parades, organized in grand style by Boethius himself, who also thanked Theoderic in the Senate House with a panegyric.¹³⁵ A few months later Boethius was appointed master of the offices for the following year. Once in Ravenna, however, he found himself entangled in accusations of conspiracy against Theoderic. Members of the king’s entourage had accused Albinus of corresponding with Emperor Justin to conspire against the king, acting, they alleged, on behalf of the Senate. Barnish has intriguingly speculated that “the letter of Albinus to the east concerned the possible regency or succession of Theodahad, and the libertas Romana allegedly hoped for by Boethius involved a senatorial share in the choice of Rome’s ruler.”¹³⁶ It is certain that Boethius defended Albinus and the Roman Senate, and eventually the accusation fell upon him too. Theoderic trusted the accusers, strongly relying on his entourage. Boethius was first imprisoned and then, in the following year, executed.¹³⁷

While it remains unclear how much truth there was in the allegations against Albinus, this story took place at a time when waves of tragic news from the other kings were reaching Italy. The Roman senators employed at the palace were informed of the changes in the international scenario, and as the master of the offices, it was Boethius who introduced the king to the legates bearing all this news.¹³⁸ The international role of the Gothic kingdom was weakening, and it is possible that some senators thought to take advantage of the situation, looking to the empire as the alternative. The affair of Albinus had put the whole Senate at risk of an accusation en masse; shortly before his death, Boethius claimed that the king desired “the common ruin” of the senators.¹³⁹

At first, Theoderic did not regret his decision to have Boethius killed; a short time later he also ordered the execution of Symmachus, who was the head of the Senate.¹⁴⁰ Then Theoderic compelled Pope John I to accompany some senators to Constantinople. According to the Anonymus Valesianus, the pope was sent to ask Justin to allow the Arians to profess their religion, while in the Book of the Popes we read that the king wanted the confiscated churches, including those in the East, to be restored to the Arians. When the emperor issued the law that deprived the mostly Gothic Arians of their religious freedom, he may have been motivated in part by a desire for retaliation for the affair of Albinus and Boethius. There were still many Gothic Arians who were living in the East, and Theoderic was concerned for their rights. The pope’s mission failed on this particular issue, however, and as soon as he returned, he and the other members of the embassy were put in prison. John I died a short time later.¹⁴¹ This series of events largely compromised the strong relationship that had stood between Theoderic, the Roman Senate, and the church for thirty years.

Cassiodorus had replaced Boethius as the master of the offices, and some of the letters of the Variae that he wrote during the years of his appointment, 523–526, shed a little light on these critical period at the palace of Ravenna. Prestigious appointments that were traditionally held by members of the Roman Senate were now granted instead to Boethius’s enemies; these were the people Theoderic kept closer in those years. Among the men whose careers especially benefited were two pairs of brothers, Opilio and Cyprianus, and Decoratus and Honoratus. They were appointed to key offices, such as quaestor of the palace and count of the Sacred Largesses, and Theoderic praised them for their merits and honored their friendship, which he held very dear.¹⁴² When promoting Honoratus to quaestor in late 524, Theoderic, addressing the Roman senators, memorialized Decoratus, the candidate’s brother who had preceded him in the office but had recently died. Among the deeds Theoderic recalled was Decoratus’s participation in a famous trial where he defended a patrician whose name is purposely not specified: was this perhaps Albinus or Boethius?¹⁴³

Great eulogies were also made for the promotion of Cyprianus to the office of count of the Sacred Largesses that same year.¹⁴⁴ On this occasion the king referenced the great trust he had in this collaborator, with whom he used to ride horses and share private conversations.¹⁴⁵ In addition, Cyprianus had participated in several military operations, was able to speak Gothic, and had provided his sons with a military education and knowledge of the Gothic language.¹⁴⁶ Courtiers like these molded themselves to the expectations of their rulers. An enormous social and cultural gap separated them from the members of the senatorial elite, such as Albinus, Boethius, and Symmachus. In fact, Cyprianus and his friends are the exact same courtiers whom Boethius blamed in the apologia of the Consolatio as improbi and flagitiosi, while accusing the king of having them rewarded for their crimes rather than punishing them.¹⁴⁷ The growing relationships of Theoderic with these courtiers during the years 523–526 show that the king’s trust in the Roman Senate had reached its lowest point, and that only a few Roman families were now close to the court.

Theoderic’s distrust of the Senate and the Roman Church created immense internal problems inside the Gothic kingdom at the same time as the king’s external political relationships were crumbling and tensions with the empire increasing. Adding to this chaos were the extremely limited possibilities of finding an Amal adult male who could rule over the Goths in Italy. Theoderic did not consider handing his throne to Amalaric, his grandson who was the heir apparent to the Visigothic throne, and who by now was of age to rule. It had been Eutharic who, through his son Athalaric, was meant to reunify the Gothic people. Theoderic also had never even considered his adult nephew, the greedy Theodahad, as a potential tutor for Athalaric, much less as an heir and successor.

During these difficult, turbulent years, Amalasuintha was living in the palace at Ravenna. She was at the palace when embassy after embassy arrived, bringing bad news and a growing sense of isolation from the other kingdoms; she was a witness to Theoderic’s break with the senatorial class and the Roman clergy, and to the executions the king ordered. She must have experienced all the stress these situations provoked, and she must have been closely watching her father’s politics of succession.

Protecting the Heir

On his deathbed, Theoderic designated as heir to his throne his grandson Athalaric, who was at that time barely ten years old, if not even younger.¹⁴⁸ In a way he was repeating the procedure followed in 474 by his own father, Theudimer, who, when his death was imminent, had called together his Goths to announce the succession of his son.¹⁴⁹ At this time the Ostrogoths seem to have followed the principle of transmission of royal power to the oldest direct legitimate male descendant. But this did not preclude a possible claim by Theodahad, the son of Amalafrida and at that time the only adult male of the family. Although his father’s identity remains a mystery, his direct descent from Theudimer made him a good candidate. However, Theoderic had managed to keep him as far as possible from his palace and from his army.

As in the other kingdoms, patrilineal descent was desirable but not indispensable. Examples from the Vandal, Burgundian, Visigothic and Frankish kingdoms show the ways in which fifth- and sixth-century kings were experimenting with new political solutions in matters of succession. There were no established rules on this matter, and in each state things were handled differently.¹⁵⁰ Pagan polygamy or polygyny, children from concubines, multiple sons: all these factors complicated legitimacy and succession, and very often there was more than one heir on the throne. This had happened, for example, in Gaul in 511 with the four descendants of Clovis, and recently in 524 at the death of Chlodomer. In the Frankish realm the succession was uneasy between brothers and their many children, and the kingdom was divided among heirs.¹⁵¹ In the Burgundian kingdom we know that Sigismund held the title of rex starting around 505, during the lifetime of his father Gundobad, and the Burgundians may have originally followed agnatic seniority.¹⁵²

The Vandals, beginning with Geiseric, regularly used agnatic seniority. According to Procopius, this king on his deathbed hoped that the Hasdings, his family, would maintain their rule over the Vandals, and he gave specific directions. This is considered by Victor of Vita also as his constitutio or “testament”:¹⁵³ “The royal power among them should always fall to that one who was the first in the years among all the male offspring descended from Geiseric himself.”¹⁵⁴ Jordanes also tells us about Geiseric’s last will, and though his version is less reliable—suggesting as it does a pacific view of the Vandal court—it offers a portrait of the Vandal idea of right succession: “Before his death he summoned the band of his sons and ordained that there should be no strife among them because of desire for the kingdom, but that each should reign in his own rank and order as he survived the others; that is, the next younger should succeed his elder brother, and he in turn should be followed by his junior. By giving heed to this command they ruled their kingdom in happiness for the space of many years and were not disgraced by civil war, as is usual among other nations; one after the other receiving the kingdom and ruling the people in peace.”¹⁵⁵ Despite Jordanes’s words, in matters of succession the Vandal kingdom had a history of violence going back at least a century. In 428 Geiseric had arranged to have the wife and two children of his half brother (Gunderic) murdered after his death, probably in order to avoid a regency of the children and their mother, and thus their future claims to the throne.¹⁵⁶ This bloody legacy was transmitted to his descendants, despite Geiseric’s clear instructions for the succession (discussed above). The eldest of his three sons, Huneric, took power and eliminated his brother Theoderic, together with his children.¹⁵⁷ Huneric badly mutilated his first wife, the daughter of the Visigothic king Theoderic, and sent her back to Gaul under the suspicion that she was conspiring against him.¹⁵⁸ The reasons for such a monstrous act may have been political: later he married Eudocia, Valentinian III’s daughter, who bore him Hilderic, and this probably facilitated the legitimation of his rule over Africa. Later, in 523, as we have seen, Amalafrida was accused of conspiring against Hilderic and imprisoned; she was not given the chance to return to Italy or stay as queen mother (in a Cassiodoran letter addressed to the Vandal king, the Gothic rulers complained: “you did not tolerate that she, whom you had as former queen, lived as a private person [.] … [S]he should have been sent back to us with honor…. [S]he should have been regarded as a mother, she who transmitted the kingdom to you.”).¹⁵⁹ Neither her close kinship with Theoderic nor the fact that she had no children from Thrasamund to claim the Vandal throne could save her life. It is obvious that in this grim reality queens often paid the ultimate price: of the five royal women of the Vandal kingdom whose fates we know, three were murdered, another was sent back to her country mutilated, and one was able to escape from the kingdom years later.¹⁶⁰

Gaul too had recently experienced similar tragedies. Queen Clotilde had intervened on behalf of her sons with Theoderic about the division of the kingdom. She also made efforts to protect her grandchildren, but these proved futile in face of the jealousy of her sons. When in 524 King Chlodomer died, she could not save her grandsons from their uncles, Chlothar and Childebert, who had them murdered. The third grandson would have been killed as well, had viri fortes (likely the aristocrats closest to Chlodomer) not intervened and helped him retire to a monastery.¹⁶¹

Last but not least, the Roman Empire itself had a rich history of usurpations, including recent examples in the East with which Theoderic was familiar, like Basiliscus and Zeno.

In Ravenna, Theoderic wanted to prevent any risk of a coup d’état and to protect his grandson and daughter’s lives from situations of violence like these, which had taken the lives, in his family, of Amalafrida in Africa as well as Sigeric in the Burgundian kingdom. His desire for his crown to become dynastic was not unusual in the larger context of the post-Roman kingdoms. Italy, however, had the opposite problem from the other kingdoms. In Spain, Africa, and Gaul, too many potential heirs led to fratricide and sometimes to war, but in Italy there was simply no appropriate heir of an age to rule. Athalaric was far too young to govern over the Goths and the Romans, and Theoderic needed to build a general consent around his grandson and ensure that his family would be protected. Knowing very well that the acceptance of his heir rested with the Gothic aristocracy, and that things would go badly without the support of the nobility,¹⁶² he tried to stabilize the succession by winning to his cause the aristocratic Goths, his comites (probably similar to the viri fortes close to Chlodomer in Gaul), as Jordanes states in abridging Cassiodorus: “When he had reached old age and knew that he should soon depart this life, he called together the Gothic counts and chieftains of his people (Gothos comites gentisque suae primates) and appointed Athalaric as king. He was a boy scarcely ten years old, the son of his daughter Amalasuintha, and he had lost his father Eutharic. As though uttering his last will and testament Theoderic adjured and commanded them (in mandatis ac si testamentali voce denuntians) to honor their king.”¹⁶³

Jordanes’s account is confirmed by the Cassiodoran letters, in which we read that on his deathbed Theoderic asked the Goths who were closest to him for an official oath to recognize his grandson as his legitimate successor, and that the Romans were also asked to support this choice. The whole thing happened very quickly. Gothic nobles (proceres) followed this last order (even if we have doubts about the enthusiasm that Cassiodorus claims), and little Athalaric was raised to the throne of Italy.¹⁶⁴ Theoderic, the greatest hero of Gothic history, passed away on Sunday, 30 August 526, after a fifty-two-year reign.¹⁶⁵

The counts whom Theoderic hoped would support his grandchild were his old friends, and they were also commanders of the Gothic army in important cities and in the provinces of the kingdom; people like Tuluin, Osuin, and Sigismer, who had distinguished themselves on the battlefield, or at the palace, or in the administration of the provinces.¹⁶⁶ In addition there was the vir illustris Wiliarius, who from 523 to 527 held the office of count of the patrimony (comitiva patrimonii). This was an isolated case in Ostrogothic Italy, as this position was normally entrusted to Romans.¹⁶⁷

It is reasonable to assume, however, that as he lay dying, the king’s strongest hopes were placed in Amalasuintha, who by now was thirty. She was Theoderic’s only daughter still alive, and the widow of the man who had been designated heir to the throne. Of the entire Amal family, she was the only one left who had an education and deep experience at the palace, and the time to exercise the experience in politics and diplomacy that she had gained over the years on the side of her father had arrived. Amalasuintha inherited a monumental task. She was entrusted with the guardianship of her son, the rex puer. She was to provide him with maternal love and educate him to be the king of Goths and Romans, all the while keeping the situation at the court under control. Her role as tutor compelled her to take care of the affairs of the kingdom in Athalaric’s name, and to manage foreign diplomacy.

Theoderic gave specific directions about his daughter’s position in his will in order to maintain stability in the kingdom. His solution would have been unimaginable among the other tribes, including in the Frankish kingdom of the heirs of Clovis, when Queen Clotilde was still alive. But the Gothic court had been influenced by the recent past of Italy and of the empire. Galla Placidia’s regency for Valentinian III in Ravenna could have served as a model for the transmission of power, but perhaps the most likely exemplar would have been Ariadne with her child Leo II at the court of Constantinople, where Theoderic had spent part of his life.¹⁶⁸ A functioning regent, and the sole representative of the Amal family for the remaining years of the king’s minority, Amalasuintha was by now regina in her actions, and probably also in her title.¹⁶⁹

A Widow and a Rex Puer: The Beginning of the Regency