{"slug":"tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1","id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1","title":"Ad Theodoricum Regem Relatio Episcoporum","title_source":"Ad Theodoricum Regem Relatio Episcoporum","author":"Theodoricus Rex Gothorum","genre":"other","date":"","tradition":"latin","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T06:01:41Z","cost_usd":0.001944},"source":{"registry_id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1","work_id":"tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1","edition":"ogl-pl","language":"","license":"Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/tmp1261/tmp1261/tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1.xml"},"stats":{"passages":3,"english_words":644,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":2533,"commentary_units":17,"commentary_kinds":7,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":6,"work_notes":5,"external_links":0,"timeline":5},"summary":{"work":"tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1","abstract":"This work is a letter from a group of bishops to Theodoric the Great, king of the Ostrogoths (r. 493–526), addressing ecclesiastical matters in early 6th-century Italy. The text likely belongs to the period of the Laurentian schism (498–506) or the Synod of Rome (502). It survives only in later manuscript copies, with the original lost. The letter is rarely cited in later canon law or theological collections, indicating limited influence beyond its immediate context. The edition used (ogl-pl) lacks full critical apparatus, so variant readings are unverified. The letter reflects the political and religious dynamics of Theodoric's reign, including tensions between the Arian Gothic court and the Catholic episcopate.","historical_context":"The letter dates to the reign of Theodoric the Great (493–526), probably between 498 and 506, during the Laurentian schism in Rome, a conflict between Pope Symmachus and the antipope Laurentius. The bishops address Theodoric, who as Arian king of the Ostrogoths ruled Italy with a policy of religious toleration but intervened in church affairs. The text mentions 'majores domus' Gudila and Dedeulphus, Gothic officials otherwise unattested. The 'second synod' likely refers to a Roman council under Symmachus. The letter survives only in later medieval manuscript copies; the original is lost. Its transmission is obscure, and it is not included in major canon law collections, suggesting limited circulation. The Latin text shows signs of corruption, including garbled syntax and possible scribal errors.","significance":"The letter provides rare direct evidence of episcopal communication with an Arian Gothic king, illuminating the political and ecclesiastical dynamics of early 6th-century Italy. It documents the Laurentian schism and the role of Theodoric as arbiter in church disputes. Its limited later influence contrasts with more widely circulated texts, making it a valuable witness to local, non-canonical ecclesiastical correspondence.","timeline":[{"date":"493–526","event":"Reign of Theodoric the Great, Ostrogothic king of Italy."},{"date":"498–506","event":"Laurentian schism in Rome, conflict between Pope Symmachus and antipope Laurentius."},{"date":"502","event":"Synod of Rome, possibly the 'second synod' referenced in the letter."},{"date":"6th c.","event":"Composition of the letter, likely between 498 and 506."},{"date":"Medieval period","event":"Survival of the text in later manuscript copies; original lost."}],"relations":[{"work":"Liber Pontificalis","relation":"Provides context for the Laurentian schism and Pope Symmachus.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Variae of Cassiodorus","relation":"Offers contemporary administrative and political context for Theodoric's reign.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Acts of the Synod of Rome (502)","relation":"May be the 'second synod' referenced in the letter.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Historia Gothorum","relation":"Later historical source for Theodoric's rule.","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[],"cautions":["The precise year of the letter is uncertain; it is dated only broadly to Theodoric's reign (493–526).","The text survives only in later manuscript copies; the original is lost, and variant readings are unverified.","The edition used (ogl-pl) lacks full critical apparatus, so textual corruptions (e.g., 'privileIii') may not be resolved.","The 'majores domus' Gudila and Dedeulphus are otherwise unattested, making their identification speculative.","The 'second synod' is not explicitly identified; it may refer to the Synod of Rome (502) or another local council."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.00047,"generated":"2026-11-15T06:01:41Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Open Greek and Latin Patrologia Latina","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/tmp1261/tmp1261/tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1.xml"}],"checks":{"work":"tmp1261.tmp1261.opp-lat1","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":3,"translated":3,"commentary_passages":3,"commentary_units":17,"english_words":644,"source_letters":2525,"commentary_kinds":7},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The work is a letter from a group of bishops to Theodoric the Great, king of the Ostrogoths, likely concerning ecclesiastical matters. It reflects the political and religious dynamics of early 6th-century Italy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The letter is dated to the reign of Theodoric (493–526), but the precise year is uncertain. It may belong to the period of the Laurentian schism (498–506) or the Synod of Rome (502).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The text survives only in later manuscript copies; the original is lost. The edition used (ogl-pl) may not include full critical apparatus, so variant readings are unverified.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This letter is rarely cited in later medieval canon law or theological collections, suggesting limited influence beyond its immediate historical context.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The edition does not provide a translation or detailed historical commentary; readers should consult supplementary sources for the political and ecclesiastical background.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: other in Latin; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 3 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: ogl-pl — Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":3},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"THEODORICUM REGEM AD EPISCOPORUM. RELATIO\n\nAgimus Deo gratias, qui regum corda pietatis suas manu et gubernat et temperat, quando ab ipso veuit quod clementia vestra ex amore suo praeceptis ad nos moderatissimis per majores domus Gudilam et Dedeulphum sublimes vestros missis ostendit. Sic enim mansuetos principes coeli Dominus fecit esse quos diligit; et propitiata Divinitas eos in causis omnibus mandatis suis ordinat obedire; quod scriptum est, dicente Deo. me nihil potestis facere (Joan. xv), quod utique boni intlelligendum est. Ideoque nostro toto affectu et obsequio jussioni vestrae parere voluimus, et ad papam, qui impetebatur, quater cum sacerdotes nostros ex secunda synodo direximus, ut ad judicium conveniret. Sed occurrere se audentiae nostrae penitus non posse statuit, mandans: Primum ad conventum vestrum, quando Romae venistis, sine aliqua dubitatione properavi, et privileIii mea voluntati regiæ submisi, et auctoritatem synocii dedi; sicut habet ecclesiastica disciplina, restaurationem ecclesiarum regularitet poposci, sed nullus mihi a vobis enectus est. Deinde cum venirem cum clero meo, crudeliter mactatus sum. Ulterius me vestro examini non committo: in potestate Dei est, et domini regit, qeid de me deliberet ordinare.","english":"We give thanks to God, who both guides and tempers the hearts of kings with the hand of piety, when from Him it comes that your clemency, out of His love, has shown to us through the most moderate precepts sent by your exalted servants, the chief officers Gudila and Dedeulphus. For thus the Lord of heaven makes gentle the princes whom He loves; and the appeased Divinity ordains that they obey His commands in all matters, as it is written, with God saying, “You can do nothing without me” (John 15), which is certainly to be understood in a good sense. Therefore, with all our affection and obedience, we wished to comply with your command, and we sent four times to the pope, who was being accused, with our priests from the second synod, so that he would come to judgment. But he determined that he could not at all submit to our audacity, declaring: “First, when you came to Rome, I hastened to your assembly without any hesitation, and I submitted the privilege to my will and to the king’s, and I gave authority to the synod; as ecclesiastical discipline holds, I demanded the restoration of churches according to rule, but no one was sent to me by you. Then, when I came with my clergy, I was cruelly slain. Further, I do not entrust myself to your examination: it is in the power of God and of the lord king to decide what he may ordain concerning me.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Agimus Deo gratias","severity":"info","text":"The opening thanksgiving to God for the king's piety is a standard epistolary topos in late antique Christian rhetoric, here framing the bishops' response to Theodoric.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"per majores domus Gudilam et Dedeulphum","severity":"info","text":"The 'majores domus' (chief officers) Gudila and Dedeulphus are otherwise unattested; their names suggest Gothic origin, reflecting Theodoric's administration.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"me nihil potestis facere (Joan. xv)","severity":"info","text":"The citation 'You can do nothing without me' loosely echoes John 15:5, but the Vulgate reads 'nihil potestis facere' in a different context; the adaptation may be a memory slip or deliberate paraphrase.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"secunda synodo","severity":"info","text":"The 'second synod' likely refers to a local council in Rome or Italy under Pope Symmachus (498–514), part of the Laurentian schism; the pope's refusal to appear reflects ongoing conflict.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"quater cum sacerdotes nostros ... direximus","severity":"info","text":"The narrative shifts from general thanksgiving to a specific account of four failed summons to the pope, marking a transition from praise to complaint.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"privileIii mea voluntati regiæ submisi","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text is corrupt here: 'privileIii' likely stands for 'privilegii' (of the privilege), and the syntax is garbled, possibly due to scribal error or a damaged exemplar.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of the pope (likely Symmachus) and the precise occasion of the synod are not specified in the text.","The phrase 'me nihil potestis facere' is a loose citation of John 15:5, but the exact wording differs from the Vulgate.","The names Gudila and Dedeulphus are otherwise unknown, leaving their roles and identities uncertain."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Post episcopos tamen ei majorem domus vestrae illustrem virum Arigernum direximus, coi quid responsi dederit sua suggestione renuntiat; et intilamus tamen serenissimo domno, quia iobis quid possimus facere non remansit, nec invitum ad disceptarionem nostram adducere possumus. Ipsi per canones appellationes omnium episcoporum commissae sunt; et cum ipse appellat, ecquid faciendum? cum nec in absentem valeamus ferre sententiam, nec contamacis loeum deputare, qui se judicibas eccurrisse præclamat; maxime quia res nova est, et pontificem sedis istius apud nes audiri, nullum constat exemplum. Voluimus quod restabat pacem jUxta præceptum et voluntatem vestram reddere civitati, quæ tes et proposito nostro amica esi, et beatitudini vestrorum temporum congruebat. Quia confusione tantae citatis et gemi. mus, et horrescimus: ad amplissimum senatum col. legasque nostros secundo direximus, orantes ex verbis Apostoli, qui monet: Quod ex vobis est, cum omnibus pacem habentes, non vosmetipsos vindicantes, charissimi, sed date locum iræ. Scriptum est etiam: Mihi vindictam, ego retribuam, dicit Dominus (Ron. XII). Nec admonitioni clericorum defuimus, quibus regulariter volumus subvenire. Quia etiam salutare monitum contempserunt; ideo vestri erit imperi notu Dei respicere Ecelesiae redintegrationera, ftomane civitatis et provinciarum quielem.","english":"After the bishops, however, we sent to him the illustrious man Arigernus, the chief of your household, to whom he gave a response which he reports in his own submission; and yet we inform your most serene lordship that nothing which we could do has been left undone by us, nor can we bring him unwilling to our disputation. Appeals of all bishops have been entrusted to him by the canons; and when he himself appeals, what is to be done? since we can neither pronounce sentence in his absence, nor assign a place to one who is contumacious, who proclaims that he has appeared before the judges; especially because this is a new matter, and there is no known precedent for a pontiff of this see being heard before us. We wished to do what remained: to restore peace to the city, in accordance with your command and will, which is both friendly to our purpose and fitting for the blessedness of your times. For we both lament and shudder at the confusion of so great a city. We have sent a second time to the most august senate and our colleagues, beseeching them with the words of the Apostle, who admonishes: \"What is of you, having peace with all, do not avenge yourselves, dearest ones, but give place to wrath.\" It is also written: \"Vengeance for me, I will repay, says the Lord\" (Rom. 12). Nor have we been lacking in admonition to the clergy, whom we wish to assist according to the rule. And since they have also scorned this salutary warning, it will therefore be for your imperial authority, by the will of God, to look to the restoration of the Church, the peace of the city of Rome and the provinces.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Arigernum","severity":"info","text":"Arigernus is a Gothic name, likely a high-ranking official in Theodoric's household, sent as an envoy after the bishops.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Quod ex vobis est, cum omnibus pacem habentes, non vosmetipsos vindicantes, charissimi, sed date locum iræ","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of Romans 12:18-19, urging peace and non-retaliation, adapted to the context of ecclesiastical conflict.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Mihi vindictam, ego retribuam, dicit Dominus","severity":"info","text":"This echoes Old Testament themes of divine retribution, possibly referencing passages like Leviticus 26 or Psalm 94, but not a direct quote.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"pontificem sedis istius","severity":"info","text":"Refers to the bishop of Rome (the pope), indicating that the case involves a papal appeal, unprecedented in this context.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Post episcopos tamen","severity":"info","text":"This phrase marks a narrative transition from the previous passage's thanksgiving to the specific actions taken, including sending Arigernus.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"contamacis loeum","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text is corrupt here; 'contamacis' likely stands for 'contumacis' (contumacious), and 'loeum' for 'locum' (place). The sense is that no place can be assigned to a contumacious person.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of 'Arigernus' is not fully specified beyond being a high official; the exact nature of the 'disceptarionem' (disputation) is unclear."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Nunc rogamus ut infirmitatibus et degnitatis nostrae, quemadmodum pii domini, succurratis; quoniam calliditati sæculari sacerdotum simplicitas non suflicit, et jam diutus nostrorum mortes, et pericula propriarum pati non possumus: sed concedite nobis optatissimo praecepto vestro, ut ad ecclesias nostras beat nos reverti, quia post hæc quæ suggessimus, niMi est quod a nobis possit ordinari. Et alia manu: Optamus vobis salutem, domine princeps.","english":"Now we ask that you, as a pious lord, come to the aid of our infirmities and our dignity; for secular cunning is more than the simplicity of priests can bear, and we can no longer endure the deaths of our men and the dangers to our own persons. But grant us by your most welcome command that we may be allowed to return to our churches, for after these matters which we have laid before you, there is nothing that can be arranged by us. And in another hand: We wish you good health, lord prince.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"infirmitatibus et degnitatis nostrae","severity":"info","text":"The pairing of 'infirmities' and 'dignity' is paradoxical: the bishops plead weakness while asserting their status, a rhetorical appeal to the king's duty as a pious lord.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"calliditati sæculari","severity":"info","text":"'Calliditati sæculari' (secular cunning) contrasts priestly simplicity, framing the conflict as a clash between worldly guile and ecclesiastical innocence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Optamus vobis salutem, domine princeps","severity":"info","text":"The closing formula 'Optamus vobis salutem' is a standard Latin epistolary valediction; 'alia manu' indicates a scribal or authorial addition, possibly authenticating the letter.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Nunc rogamus ... concedite nobis ... Et alia manu","severity":"info","text":"The passage moves from a plea for aid to a request for permission to return, ending with a separate valediction, marking a formal conclusion to the bishops' appeal.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"niMi est quod a nobis possit ordinari","severity":"info","text":"The emphatic 'niMi' (capitalized in the edition) underscores the bishops' claim of helplessness, a rhetorical device that may have influenced later readings of episcopal submission.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'degnitatis nostrae' may be a scribal error for 'dignitatis nostrae' (our dignity), but the sense is clear.","'niMi' is an unusual capitalization; it may be an editorial emphasis or a scribal feature, but the meaning is 'nothing'."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}