This volume is at once a collection and a meticulous study of the inscriptions of Ostrogothic Italy. Frauzel has recently published an important volume on the Inscriptiones Medii Aevi Italiae (saec. VI-XII). Lazio, Roma. Città Maetropolitana, 1 [1], while a second volume is scheduled to appear soon. This difficult work requires much skill and meticulosity in tracking the history of pieces which are often spread between archives and local journals. This opus was a desideratum. Only a part of the inscriptions was published over a century ago in what has been until now the reference instrument, the work of Fiebiger and Schmidt, which is dedicated also to the other "Germanic" tribes. [2] To extrapolate the Gothic inscriptions from the context and dedicate a catalogue/study focused on this subject was also possible thanks to recent progress on the Gothic onomastics, including the fundamental investigations by the late Nicoletta Francovich Onesti († 2014). Without her work and those of other Germanists it would be not always possible to determine who is "Goth" - a doubt that remains in many cases (see Frauzel's observation on page 59, and the inscriptions on pages 143-174: "i casi dubbi"). Following this line, Frauzel regularly clarifies the origins and meaning of the Gothic names for each of the inscriptions. Inevitably the question arises whether all the inscriptions pertain those Goths who - or whose ancestors - came to Italy with Theoderic in 489, or if some of them are related to Goths or other barbarian groups who entered Italy during the fifth century: see for example the inscriptions on page 81 and 115.

In the introduction (14-19) Frauzel defines and categorizes the Ostrogothic inscriptions. To the work of Fiebiger and Schmidt, she adds many documents. The pieces are restudied and better contextualized. The analysis includes the new findings, and it encompasses the materials derived from discoveries made by antiquarians and illustrious scholars like Mommsen and De Rossi, as well as the many reports of local scholars. The (re)publication of the inscriptions includes photos, maps, the accurate description of the locations of the findings and of the archeological context, the history of the pieces (which in some cases survive as transcriptions or sketches, and occasionally doubt on their authenticity rises), and the tracking of the materials that were removed from their location into other places or that were reused as construction materials. Particularly important is the contextualization of all the material through the literary sources, mostly authors of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Frauzel's work is a fundamental one, and this reviewer warmly congratulates the author.

The volume is cleverly structured: The introduction is followed by the inscriptions of the Gothic rulers and their families; then those pertaining to the Ostrogoths in general; a section on varia; one on the uncertain cases; a section on the typologies of the instrumenta, which includes an updated catalogue of the brick-stamps of Theoderic and Athalaric; an appendix on the inscriptions that date to the Consulship of Fl. Eutharicus Cillica, King Theoderic's son-in-law and the only Goth who held a Consulship (519 C.E.) during the Gothic dominance over Italy (489/93-553). All the inscriptions are also listed in alphabetical order of the places where they were found. The final part of the volume includes tables of synthesis (216-228 are very useful and list the parallels between the inscriptions), tables of concordances, and various indices.

The inscription(s) of Decennovium (29-34), which pertains to the activity of a senator under Theoderic, is one of the most important pieces. With good arguments, Giardina attributed its authorship to Cassiodorus, at that time the Quaestor of Theoderic and author of two letters related to the same circumstance. Other inscriptions, including some monograms and brick stamps, pertains to the construction and restoration of churches and especially of public buildings, which is also testified in the literary sources. However, Theodenanda's stone from Genazzano is the queen of the Gothic inscriptions [3], and it is for good reason that this photo appears on the front cover of the volume. F. reconstructs accurately the complex history of this piece, and she formulates the compelling hypothesis that the stone was originally posted in the Church of Saint Peter (27-28). In my opinion, this does not necessarily indicate a conversion to Catholicism (as the author hypothesized on page 216 and 258). After all, the Pope of that time, Silverius, had been a close ally of Theodahad, who appointed him by force against the will of the Roman clergy. [4] I wish Frauzel (on the footsteps of Fiebiger - Schmidt, or De Rossi, or Rise in the Anthologia Latina I 2 no. 1850) had here suggested a possible integration for this unique piece rather than just provide the critical apparatus with the hypotheses of other scholars. Depending on how the text is restored, the inscription of Theodenanda offers details on the Amals' family history. Frauzel should have taken here the risk of an interpretation, just like she does with the iconography of King Theodahad in an intriguing hypothesis (198-199). Even if Frauzel follows in this work the redactional directions of the Quasar, I think that the translations would have been beneficial for many of the pieces which are subject to various interpretations. After all, Frauzel accepts the equally uncertain integration for the Termoli's edict (141-142: Porena), that of the inscription from the Crypta Balbi (166-167), and the one from the stone from Vercelli (172-173).

The surviving materials bear witness to a small section of the Gothic population, mainly the upper class and the clergy. Even in light of this evidence, the question of acculturation remains open. Unlike for the papyri, we do not have inscriptions in Gothic characters. Those Goths who were buried with Latin inscriptions were mostly acculturated. Many inscriptions pertain to women. The question of religious belonging is hard to define, and it is possible that in several cases those buried were Catholic rather than Arian (e.g. 102-103, and more in detail 256-258). One case testifies to the conversion of a male Goth from Arianism to Judaism (122-123). This evidence fits perfectly within the context of Theoderic's religious tolerance, which concerned also Judaism (see for example the episode in Ravenna during the Consulship of Eutharic: Anonymus Valesianus 80-82).

Finally, the geography and chronology of the of the findings (on this regard, 232-248) indicate that the panorama on the presence of the Goths in Italy is broader with respect to what we get from the Variae of Cassiodorus, but also from Procopius and his continuators, who locate the last Goths of the post-bellum and the last resistance in the North of Italy, between Verona, Pavia and Brescia. This corpus shows that this is not necessarily the case (cf. on page 119 the hypothesis on the miles Totila) and suggests that the distribution and the integration over time of the Goths with the Roman and the Catholic religion was far more articulated that what appears from Cassiodorus's Variae, interpretation of which has led various scholars to a distorted view of the accommodation and integration of this people.

If this reviewer has a slight critique, it is Frauzel's rationale to introduce her research. For example, it sounds ungenerous (13) the statement that in Fiebiger and Schmidt's corpus "quasi nessuna riproduzione grafica o fotografica dei reperti è acclusa alle schede, che sono, in ultima analisi, estremamente stringate e generiche (si tratta in sostanza di trascrizioni correlate di brevi commenti di carattere storico-filologico, una sorta di "CIL dei barbari", molto più disorganico e approssimativo dell'opera ispiratrice)." The work was published in the middle of World War I, and the addenda of the years 1939 and 1944 were brought in even more difficult circumstances. For generations this corpus has helped the scholars of the barbarian invasions. Similarly, this reviewer is taken aback by Frauzel's description (13) of the "più o meno modeste opere di amatori locali". It is often the local enthusiasts who have discovered, preserved, and brought to the attention little-known pieces which were often dismissed in times when the scholars' interests in this field was marginal. I believe it is always important to honour the efforts of the many enthusiasts who did not have the possibility to work in the right conditions. None of this is necessary to make the case for the necessity of Frauzel's wonderful research.

Any future research on Ostrogothic Italy and its society cannot ignore this brilliant work. My greatest hope is that the author continues her research in this direction, and that she publishes in the future the corpora of the inscriptions of the other post-Roman kingdoms.

Notes:

[1] Spoleto 2021.

[2] Otto Fiebiger / Ludwig Schmidt (eds.): Inschriftensammlung zur Geschichte der Ostgermanen (= Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Denkschriften; 60), Band 3, Vienna 1917. Addenda as integrations to the texts were brought by Fiebiger in the years 1939 and 1944.

[3] This princess is clearly unrelated to the homonymous girl buried in Salerno in year 566 (125-127). I don't understand the author's observation on page 12 with n. 7.

[4] Liber Pontificalis 60, 1; Marcellinus Comes, Additamentum ad Chronicon s.a. 536. See discussion in Massimiliano Vitiello: Theodahad: A Platonic King at the Collapse of Ostrogothic Italy, Toronto 2014, 143-144.

Massimiliano Vitiello