Editing Theodosius I (section)

== Reign ==
[[File:Roman empire 395.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|The administrative divisions of the [[Roman Empire]] in 395, under Theodosius I.]]
[[File:Valentinianus Solidus 621120.jpg|thumb|''Solidus'' of Valentinian II showing Valentinian II and Theodosius I on the reverse, each holding a ''mappa'']]

===Gothic War (376–382)===
The immediate problem facing Theodosius upon his accession was how to check the bands of Goths that were laying waste to the Balkans, with an army that had been severely depleted of manpower following the debacle at Adrianople.{{sfn|Hebblewhite|pp=30–31}} The western emperor Gratian, who seems to have provided only little immediate assistance,{{sfn|McLynn|2005|p=94}} surrendered to Theodosius control of the [[praetorian prefecture of Illyricum]] for the duration of the conflict, giving his new colleague full charge the war effort.{{sfn|Woods|2023|loc=Foreign Policy}} Theodosius implemented stern and desperate recruiting measures, resorting to the conscription of farmers and miners.{{sfn|Hebblewhite|p=31}} Punishments were instituted for harboring deserters and furnishing unfit recruits, and even self-mutilation did not exempt men from service.{{sfnm|1a1=Curran|1p=101|2a1=Hebblewhite|2p=32}} Theodosius also admitted large numbers of non-Roman auxiliaries into the army, even Gothic deserters from beyond the Danube.{{sfn|Curran|p=102}} Some of these foreign recruits were exchanged with more reliable Roman garrison troops stationed in [[Roman Egypt|Egypt]].{{sfn|Errington|1996b|pp=5–6}}

In the second half of 379, Theodosius and his generals, based at [[Thessalonica]], won some minor victories over individual bands of raiders. However, they suffered at least one serious defeat in 380, which was blamed on the treachery of the new barbarian recruits.{{sfnm|1a1=Hebblewhite|1p=33|2a1=Woods|2y=2023|2loc="Foreign Policy"}} During the autumn of 380, a life-threatening illness, from which Theodosius recovered, prompted him to request [[baptism]]. Some obscure victories were recorded in official sources around this time, however, and, in November 380, the military situation was found to be sufficiently stable for Theodosius to move his court to [[Constantinople]].{{sfnm|1a1=Errington|1y=1996b|1pp=16–17|2a1=Hebblewhite|2p=33}} There, the emperor enjoyed a propaganda victory when, in January 381, he received the visit and submission of a minor Gothic leader, [[Athanaric]].{{sfnm|1a1=Woods|1y=2023|1loc="Foreign Policy"|2a1=Hebblewhite|2p=34}} By this point, however, Theodosius seems to have no longer believed that the Goths could be completely ejected from Roman territory.{{sfnm|1a1=Errington|1y=1996b|1p=18|2a1=Hebblewhite|2p=34}} After Athanaric died that very same month, the emperor gave him a funeral with full honors, impressing his entourage and signaling to the enemy that the Empire was disposed to negotiate terms.{{sfnm|1a1=Errington|1y=2006|1p=63|2a1=Hebblewhite|2p=34}} During the campaigning season of 381, reinforcements from Gratian drove the Goths out of the [[Diocese of Macedonia]] and [[Ancient Thessaly|Thessaly]] into the [[Diocese of Thrace]], while, in the latter sector, Theodosius or one of his generals repulsed an incursion by a group of [[Sciri]] and [[Huns]] across the Danube.{{sfn|Errington|1996b|pp=17, 19}}

Following negotiations which likely lasted at least several months, the Romans and Goths finally concluded a settlement on 3 October 382.{{sfnm|1a1=Errington|1y=1996b|1pp=19–20|2a1=Hebblewhite|2pp=35, 36}} In return for military service to Rome, the Goths were allowed to settle some tracts of Roman land south of the Danube. The terms were unusually favorable to the Goths, reflecting the fact that they were entrenched in Roman territory and had not been driven out.{{sfnm|1a1=Errington|1y=2006|1pp=64–66|2a1=Hebblewhite|2pp=36–37, 39}} Namely, instead of fully submitting to Roman authority, they were allowed to remain autonomous under their own leaders, and thus remaining a strong, unified body. The Goths now settled within the Empire would largely fight for the Romans as a national contingent, as opposed to being fully integrated into the Roman forces.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=34}}

[[File:The Roman Empire ca 400 AD (Danube provinces).png|left|thumb|Roman provinces along the Ister ([[Danube]]), showing the [[Roman dioceses]] of [[Diocese of Thrace|Thrace]], [[Diocese of Dacia|Dacia]], [[Diocese of Pannonia|Pannonia]] and [[Italia Annonaria]] on the empire's northern frontier]]

=== 383–384 ===
[[File:Theodosiusi658cng.jpg|thumb|''Solidus'' of Theodosius, showing both him and his co-emperor [[Valentinian II]] ({{Reign|375|392}}) enthroned on the reverse, each crowned by [[Victoria (mythology)|Victory]] and together holding an [[Globus cruciger|orb]] {{Smallcaps|victoria {{abbreviation|augg|augusti}}}} ("''the Victory of the Augusti''")]]According to the ''[[Chronicon Paschale]]'', Theodosius celebrated his ''quinquennalia'' on 19 January 383 at Constantinople; on this occasion he raised his eldest son [[Arcadius]] to co-emperor (''augustus'').{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} Sometime in 383, Gratian's wife Constantia died.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=319–320|loc="Gratianus"}} Gratian remarried, wedding [[Laeta]], whose father was a ''[[consularis]]'' of [[Roman Syria]].<ref name=":2">{{Citation|last1=Bond| first1=Sarah|title=Gratian |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2105|work=The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity |year=2018|editor-last=Nicholson|editor-first=Oliver|publisher=Oxford University Press|language=en|doi=10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001|isbn=978-0-19-866277-8|access-date=25 October 2020|last2=Nicholson|first2=Oliver}}</ref> Early 383 saw the acclamation of [[Magnus Maximus]] as emperor in Britain and the appointment of [[Themistius]] as ''[[praefectus urbi]]'' in Constantinople.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} On 25 August 383, according to the ''Consularia Constantinopolitana'', Gratian was killed at [[Lugdunum]] ([[Lyon]]) by [[Andragathius]], the ''[[magister equitum]]'' of the rebel emperor during the rebellion of Magnus Maximus.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=319–320|loc="Gratianus"}} Constantia's body arrived in Constantinople on 12 September that year and was buried in the Church of the Holy Apostles on 1 December.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=319–320|loc="Gratianus"}} Gratian was deified as {{Langx|la|Divus Gratianus|lit=the Divine Gratian}}.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=319–320|loc="Gratianus"}}

Theodosius, unable to do much about Maximus due to ongoing military inadequacy, opened negotiations with the Persian emperor [[Shapur III]] ({{Reign|383|388}}) of the [[Sasanian Empire]].{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=41}} According to the ''Consularia Constantinopolitana'', Theodosius received in Constantinople an embassy from them in 384.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}

In an attempt to curb Maximus's ambitions, Theodosius appointed Flavius Neoterius as the [[Praetorian Prefect of Italy]].{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=42}} In the summer of 384, Theodosius met his co-emperor Valentinian II in northern Italy.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=321–322|loc="Valentinianus II"}}{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} Theodosius brokered a peace agreement between Valentinian and Magnus Maximus which endured for several years.<ref name=":7">{{Citation|last=Bond|first=Sarah|title=Valentinian II|url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4928|work=The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity |year=2018|editor-last=Nicholson|editor-first=Oliver|publisher=Oxford University Press|language=en|doi=10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001|isbn=978-0-19-866277-8|access-date=25 October 2020}}</ref>

Theodosius I was based in Constantinople, and according to [[Peter Heather]], wanted, "for his own dynastic reasons (for his two sons each eventually to inherit half of the empire), refused to appoint a recognized counterpart in the west. As a result he was faced with rumbling discontent there, as well as dangerous [[usurper]]s, who found plentiful support among the bureaucrats and military officers who felt they were not getting a fair share of the imperial cake."<ref name="Peter Heather">{{cite book |last1=Heather |first1=Peter |title=The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians |date=2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-532541-6 |edition=illustrated, reprint|pages=29–30}}</ref>

=== Middle reign: 384–387 ===
Theodosius's second son [[Honorius (emperor)|Honorius]] was born on 9 December 384 and titled ''[[nobilissimus puer]]'' (or ''nobilissimus iuvenis'').{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} The death of Aelia Flaccilla, Theodosius's first wife and the mother of Arcadius, Honorius, and Pulcheria, occurred by 386.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} She died at [[Scotumis]] in [[Diocese of Thrace|Thrace]] and was buried at Constantinople, her [[Funeral oration (ancient Greece)|funeral oration]] delivered by [[Gregory of Nyssa]].{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Groß-Albenhausen|first=Kirsten|year=2006|title=Flacilla|url=https://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/brill-s-new-pauly/flacilla-e412010|journal=Brill's New Pauly|language=en}}</ref> A statue of her was dedicated in the [[Byzantine Senate]].<ref name=":1" /> In 384 or 385, Theodosius's niece [[Serena (wife of Stilicho)|Serena]] was married to the ''magister militum'', [[Stilicho]].{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}

[[Image:Forum Theodosius Istanbul March 2008 (18) detail.JPG|thumb|250px|Marble fragment of monumental column to emperor Theodosius I]]
In the beginning of 386, Theodosius's daughter [[Pulcheria (daughter of Theodosius I)|Pulcheria]] also died.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} That summer, more Goths were defeated, and many were settled in [[Phrygia]].{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} According to the ''Consularia Constantinopolitana'', a [[Roman triumph]] over the Gothic [[Greuthungi]] was then celebrated at Constantinople.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} The same year, work began on the great triumphal column in the [[Forum of Theodosius]] in Constantinople, the [[Column of Theodosius]].{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} The ''Consularia Constantinopolitana'' records that on 19 January 387, Arcadius celebrated his ''quinquennalia'' in Constantinople.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} By the end of the month, there was an uprising or riot in [[Antioch]] (modern [[Antakya]]).{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} The [[Roman–Persian Wars]] concluded with the signing of the [[Peace of Acilisene]] with Persia. By the terms of the agreement, the ancient [[Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity)|Kingdom of Armenia]] was divided between the powers.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}

By the end of the 380s, Theodosius and the court were in Milan and northern Italy had settled down to a period of prosperity.{{sfn|Brown|2012|p=135}} Peter Brown says gold was being made in Milan by those who owned land as well as by those who came with the court for government service.{{sfn|Brown|2012|p=135}} Great landowners took advantage of the court's need for food, "turning agrarian produce into gold", while repressing and misusing the poor who grew it and brought it in. According to Brown, modern scholars link the decline of the Roman empire to the avarice of the rich of this era. He quotes Paulinus of Milan as describing these men as creating a court where "everything was up for sale".{{sfn|Brown|2012|pp=136, 146}} In the late 380s, [[Ambrose]], the bishop of Milan took the lead in opposing this, presenting the need for the rich to care for the poor as "a necessary consequence of the unity of all Christians".{{sfn|Brown|2012|p=147}} This led to a major development in the political culture of the day called the “advocacy revolution of the later Roman empire".{{sfn|Brown|2012|p=144}} This revolution had been fostered by the imperial government, and it encouraged appeals and denunciations of bad government from below. However, Brown adds that, "in the crucial area of taxation and the treatment of fiscal debtors, the late Roman state [of the 380s and 390s] remained impervious to Christianity".{{sfn|Brown|2012|p=145}}

=== Civil war: 387–388 ===
The peace with Magnus Maximus was broken in 387, and Valentinian escaped to the east with Justina, reaching Thessalonica ([[Thessaloniki]]) in summer or autumn 387 and appealing to Theodosius for aid; Valentinian II's sister [[Galla (wife of Theodosius I)|Galla]] was then married to the eastern emperor at Thessalonica in late autumn.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=321–322|loc="Valentinianus II"}}{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} Theodosius may still have been in Thessalonica when he celebrated his ''decennalia'' on 19 January 388.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} Theodosius was consul for the second time in 388.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} Galla and Theodosius's first child, a son named Gratian, was born in 388 or 389.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} In summer 388, Theodosius recovered Italy from Magnus Maximus for Valentinian, and in June, the meeting of Christians deemed heretics was banned by Valentinian.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=321–322|loc="Valentinianus II"}}{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}

The armies of Theodosius and Maximus fought at the [[Battle of Poetovio]] in 388, which saw Maximus defeated. On 28 August 388 Maximus was executed.{{sfn|Williams|Friell| 1995|p=64}} Now the ''de facto'' ruler of the Western empire as well, Theodosius celebrated his victory in Rome on 13 June 389 and stayed in [[Milan]] until 391, installing his own loyalists in senior positions including the new ''[[magister militum]]'' of the West, the Frankish general [[Arbogast (magister militum)|Arbogast]].{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=64}} According to the ''Consularia Constantinopolitana'', Arbogast killed [[Flavius Victor]] ({{Reign|384|388}}), Magnus Maximus's young son and co-emperor, in Gaul in August/September that year. ''[[damnatio memoriae]]'' was pronounced against them, and inscriptions naming them were erased.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}

=== Massacre and its aftermath: 388–391 ===
[[File:Massacre in the Hippodrome of Thessaloniki in 390, 16th century wood engraving.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|alt=16th century engraving of the massacre of Thessalonica in the hippodrome|Massacre in the Hippodrome of Thessaloniki in 390, 16th-century wood engraving]]
The [[Massacre of Thessalonica]] (Thessaloniki) in Greece was a massacre of local civilians by Roman troops. The best estimate of the date is April of 390.<ref name="Harold Allen Drake">{{cite book |last1=Washburn |first1=Daniel |editor1-last=Albu |editor1-first=Emily |editor2-last=Drake |editor2-first=Harold Allen |editor3-last=Latham |editor3-first=Jacob |title=Violence in Late Antiquity Perceptions and Practices |date=2006 |publisher=Ashgate |isbn=978-0-7546-5498-8 |chapter=18 The Thessalonian Affair in the Fifth Century Histories}}</ref>{{rp|fn.1, 215}} The massacre was most likely a response to an urban riot that led to the murder of a Roman official. What most scholars, such as philosopher Stanislav Doležal, see as the most reliable of the sources is the ''Historia ecclesiastica'' written by [[Sozomen]] about 442; in it Sozomen supplies the identity of the murdered Roman official as Butheric, the commanding general of the field army in Illyricum (magister militum per Illyricum).<ref name="Stanislav Doležal"/>{{rp|91}} According to Sozomen, a popular charioteer tried to rape a cup-bearer, (or possibly Butheric himself), and in response, Butheric arrested and jailed the charioteer.<ref name="Stanislav Doležal"/>{{rp|93–94}}<ref name="Sozomen">Sozomenus, ''Ecclesiastical History 7.25''</ref> The populace demanded the chariot racer's release, and when Butheric refused, a general revolt rose up costing Butheric his life.<ref name="Harold Allen Drake"/>{{rp|216–217}} Doležal says the name "Butheric" indicates he might have been a Goth, and that the general's ethnicity "could have been" a factor in the riot, but none of the early sources actually say so.<ref name="Stanislav Doležal">{{cite journal |last1=Doležal |first1=Stanislav |title=Rethinking a Massacre: What Really Happened in Thessalonica and Milan in 390? |journal=Eirene: Studia Graeca et Latina|issn= 0046-1628 |date=2014|publisher=[[Czech Academy of Sciences]] |volume=50 |issue=1–2 |url=}}</ref>{{rp|92, 96}}

====Sources====
There are no contemporaneous accounts. Church historians [[Sozomen]], [[Theodoret|Theodoret the bishop of Cyrrhus]], [[Socrates of Constantinople]] and [[Tyrannius Rufinus|Rufinus]] wrote the earliest accounts during the fifth century. These are moral accounts emphasizing imperial piety and ecclesial action rather than historical and political details.<ref name="Harold Allen Drake"/>{{rp|215, 218}}<ref>"Biennial Conference on Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity (5th : 2003" : University of California, Santa Barbara). ''Violence in Late Antiquity: Perceptions and Practices''. United Kingdom, Ashgate, 2006. p. 223</ref> Further difficulty is created by these events moving into legend in art and literature almost immediately.<ref name="Greenslade">{{cite book |editor1-last=Greenslade |editor1-first=S. L.|title=Early Latin Theology Selections from Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, and Jerome |date=1956 |publisher=Westminster Press |isbn=978-0-664-24154-4}}</ref>{{rp|251}} Doležal explains that yet another problem is created by aspects of these accounts contradicting one another to the point of being mutually exclusive.<ref name="Harold Allen Drake"/>{{rp|216}} Nonetheless, most classicists accept at least the basic account of the massacre, although they continue to dispute when it happened, who was responsible for it, what motivated it, and what impact it had on subsequent events.{{sfn|McLynn|1994|pp=90, 216}}

====Theodosius's role====
[[File:Anthonis van Dyck 005.jpg|thumb|alt=Anthonis van Dyck|Anthonis Van Dyke's 1619 painting of St. Ambrose blocking the cathedral door, refusing Theodosius's admittance, a "pious fiction" invented by Theodoret ([[National Gallery]]).<ref name="Chestnut"/>]]
Theodosius was not in Thessalonica when the massacre occurred. The court was in Milan.<ref name="Harold Allen Drake"/>{{rp|223}} Several scholars, such as historian [[G. W. Bowersock]] and authors Stephen Williams and Gerard Friell, think that Theodosius ordered the massacre in an excess of "volcanic anger".{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=68}} McLynn also puts all the blame on the Emperor<ref name="Stanislav Doležal"/>{{rp|103}} as does the less dependable fifth century historian, Theodoret.<ref>Theodoretus, ''Ecclesiastical History 5.17''</ref> Other scholars, such as historians Mark Hebblewhite and N. Q. King, do not agree.{{sfn|Hebblewhite|p=103}}<ref name="Noel Quinton King">{{cite book |last1=King |first1=Noel Quinton |title=The Emperor Theodosius and the Establishment of Christianity |date=1960 |publisher=Westminster Press|asin=B0000CL13G |page=68}}</ref> [[Peter Brown (historian)|Peter Brown]] points to the empire's established process of decision making, which required the emperor "to listen to his ministers" before acting.<ref name="Brownpowerandpersuasion">{{cite book|last=Brown|first=Peter|title=Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire|publisher=Univ of Wisconsin Press|year=1992|isbn=978-0-299-13344-3}}</ref>{{rp|111}} There is some indication in the sources Theodosius did listen to his counselors but received bad or misleading advice.<ref name="Stanislav Doležal"/>{{rp|95–98}}

J. F. Matthews argues that the Emperor first tried to punish the city by selective executions. Peter Brown concurs: "As it was, what was probably planned as a selective killing&nbsp;... got out of hand".<ref>Mathews, J. F. 1997, “Codex Theodosianus 9.40.13 and Nicomachus Flavianus”, Historia: Zeitschrift für alte Geschichte, 46; pp. 202–206.</ref><ref name="Brownpowerandpersuasion"/>{{rp|110}} Doleźal says Sozomen is very specific in saying that in response to the riot, the soldiers made random arrests in the hippodrome to perform a few public executions as a demonstration of imperial disfavor, but the citizenry objected. Doleźal suggests, "The soldiers, realizing that they were surrounded by angry citizens, perhaps panicked&nbsp;... and&nbsp;... forcibly cleared the hippodrome at the cost of several thousands of lives of local inhabitants".<ref name="Stanislav Doležal"/>{{rp|103–104}}  McLynn says Theodosius was “unable to impose discipline upon the faraway troops" and covered that failure by taking responsibility for the massacre on himself, declaring he had given the order then countermanded it too late to stop it.<ref name="Stanislav Doležal"/>{{rp|102–104}}

[[Ambrose]], the bishop of Milan and one of Theodosius's many counselors, was away from court. After being informed of events concerning Thessalonica, he wrote Theodosius a letter offering what McLynn calls a different way for the emperor to "save face" and restore his public image.<ref name="Wolfe Liebeschuetz"/>{{rp|262}} Ambrose urges a semi-public demonstration of penitence, telling the emperor he  will not give Theodosius communion until this is done. [[Wolf Liebeschuetz]] says "Theodosius duly complied and came to church without his imperial robes, until Christmas, when Ambrose openly admitted him to communion".<ref name="Wolfe Liebeschuetz">{{cite book |editor1-last=Liebeschuetz |editor1-first=Wolfe |editor2-last=Hill |editor2-first=Carole |title=Ambrose of Milan Political Letters and Speeches |date=2005 |publisher=Liverpool University Press|chapter=Letter on the Massacre at Thessalonica|isbn=978-0-85323-829-4}}</ref>{{rp|262–263}}

Washburn says the image of the mitered prelate braced in the door of the cathedral in Milan blocking Theodosius from entering is a product of the imagination of Theodoret who wrote of the events of 390 "using his own ideology to fill the gaps in the historical record".<ref name="Chestnut">{{cite journal |last1=Chesnut |first1=Glenn F. |title=The Date of Composition of Theodoret's Church history |journal=Vigiliae Christianae |date=1981 |volume=35 |issue=3 |pages=245–252 |doi=10.2307/1583142 |jstor=1583142}}</ref><ref name="Harold Allen Drake"/>{{rp|215}} Peter Brown also says there was no dramatic encounter at the church door.<ref name="Brownpowerandpersuasion"/>{{rp|111}} McLynn states that "the encounter at the church door has long been known as a pious fiction".{{sfn|McLynn|1994|p=291}}{{sfn|Cameron|pp=63, 64}} Wolfe Liebeschuetz says Ambrose advocated a course of action which avoided the kind of public humiliation Theodoret describes, and that is the course Theodosius chose.<ref name="Wolfe Liebeschuetz"/>{{rp|262}}

====Aftermath====
According to the early twentieth century historian [[Henry Smith Williams]], history's assessment of Theodosius's character has been stained by the massacre of Thessalonica for centuries. Williams describes Theodosius as a virtuous-minded, courageous man, who was vigorous in pursuit of any important goal, but through contrasting the "inhuman massacre of the people of Thessalonica" with "the generous pardon of the citizens of Antioch" after civil war, Williams also concludes Theodosius was "hasty and choleric".<ref name="Henry Smith Williams">{{cite book |last1=Williams |first1=Henry Smith |title=The Historians' History of the World: A Comprehensive Narrative of the Rise and Development of Nations as Recorded by Over Two Thousand of the Great Writers of All Ages |date=1907 |publisher=Hooper & Jackson, Limited|volume=6|page=529}}</ref>  It is only modern scholarship that has begun disputing Theodosius's responsibility for those events.

From the time [[Edward Gibbon]] wrote his ''Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire'', Ambrose's action after the fact has been cited as an example of the church's dominance over the state in Antiquity.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gibbon |first1=Edward |editor1-last=Smith |editor1-first=William |title=The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire |date=1857 |publisher=Harper |page=217}}</ref> [[Alan Cameron (classicist)|Alan Cameron]] says "the assumption is so widespread it would be superfluous to cite authorities. But there is not a shred of evidence for Ambrose exerting any such influence over Theodosius".{{sfn|Cameron|pp=60, 63, 131}} Brown says Ambrose was just one among many advisors, and Cameron says there is no evidence Theodosius favored him above anyone else.{{sfn|Cameron|p=64}}

By the time of the Thessalonian affair, Ambrose, an aristocrat and former governor, had been a bishop for 16 years, and during his episcopate, had seen the death of three emperors before Theodosius. These produced significant political storms, yet Ambrose held his place using what McLynn calls his "considerable qualities [and] considerable luck" to survive.{{sfn|McLynn|1994|p=xxiv}} Theodosius was in his 40s, had been emperor for 11 years, had temporarily settled the Gothic wars, and won a civil war. As a Latin speaking Nicene western leader of the Greek largely Arian East, Boniface Ramsey says he had already left an indelible mark on history.<ref name="Boniface Ramsey">{{cite book |last1=Ramsey |first1=Boniface |title=Ambrose |date=1997 |publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=978-0-415-11842-2|edition=reprint}}</ref>{{rp|12}}

McLynn asserts that the relationship between Theodosius and Ambrose transformed into myth within a generation of their deaths. He also observes that the documents revealing the relationship between these two formidable men do not show the personal friendship the legends portray. Instead, those documents read more as negotiations between the institutions the men represent: the Roman state and the Italian Church.{{sfn|McLynn|1994|p=292}}

=== Second civil war: 392–394 ===
In 391, Theodosius left his trusted general [[Arbogastes (magister militum)|Arbogast]], who had served in the Balkans after Adrianople, to be ''magister militum'' for the Western emperor Valentinian II, while Theodosius attempted to rule the entire empire from Constantinople.<ref name="Michael Kulikowski">{{cite book |last=Kulikowski |first=Michael |title=Rome's Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric |date=2006 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-139-45809-2 |page=191}}</ref>{{sfn|Heather|2007|p=212}} On 15 May 392, Valentinian II died at Vienna in Gaul ([[Vienne, Isère|Vienne]]), either by suicide or as part of a plot by Arbogast.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=321–322|loc="Valentinianus II"}} Valentinian had quarrelled publicly with Arbogast, and was found hanged in his room.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}} Arbogast announced that this had been a suicide.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}} Stephen Williams asserts that Valentinian's death left Arbogast in "an untenable position".{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}} He had to carry on governing without the ability to issue edicts and rescripts from a legitimate acclaimed emperor. Arbogast was unable to assume the role of emperor himself because of his non-Roman background.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}} Instead, on 22 August 392, Arbogast had Valentinian's master of correspondence, [[Eugenius]], proclaimed emperor in the West at Lugdunum.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}}

At least two embassies went to Theodosius to explain events, one of them Christian in make-up, but they received ambivalent replies, and were sent home without achieving their goals.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}} Theodosius raised his second son [[Honorius (emperor)|Honorius]] to emperor on 23 January 393, implying the illegality of Eugenius's rule.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995| p=129}} Williams and Friell say that by the spring of 393, the split was complete, and "in April Arbogast and Eugenius at last moved into Italy without resistance".{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=129}} [[Virius Nicomachus Flavianus|Flavianus]], the praetorian prefect of Italy whom Theodosius had appointed, defected to their side. Through early 394, both sides prepared for war.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=130}}

Theodosius gathered a large army, including the Goths whom he had settled in the [[eastern empire]] as ''[[foederati]]'', and [[Caucasus|Caucasian]] and [[Saracen]] [[auxilia]]ries, and marched against Eugenius.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=134}} The battle began on 5 September 394, with Theodosius's full frontal assault on Eugenius's forces.{{sfn|Potter|2004|p=133}} Thousands of Goths died, and in Theodosius's camp, the loss of the day decreased morale.<ref name="Kenneth G. Holum">{{cite book |last1=Holum |first1=Kenneth G. |title=Theodosian Empresses Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity |date=1989 |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-90970-0 |page=6 |chapter=One. Theodosius the Great and His Women}}</ref> It is said by [[Theodoret]] that Theodosius was visited by two "heavenly riders all in white" who gave him courage.{{sfn|Potter|2004|p=133}}

The next day, the extremely bloody battle began again and Theodosius's forces were aided by a natural phenomenon known as the [[Bora (wind)|Bora]], which can produce hurricane-strength winds. The Bora blew directly against the forces of Eugenius and disrupted the line.{{sfn|Potter|2004|p=133}} Eugenius's camp was stormed; Eugenius was captured and soon after executed.{{sfn|Potter|2004|p=533}} According to Socrates Scholasticus, Theodosius defeated Eugenius at the [[Battle of the Frigidus]] (the [[Vipava (river)|Vipava]]) on 6 September 394.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} On 8 September, Arbogast killed himself.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} According to Socrates, on 1 January 395, Honorius arrived in Mediolanum and a victory celebration was held there.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}} Zosimus records that, at the end of April 394, Theodosius's wife Galla had died while he was away at war.{{Sfn|Kienast|pp=323–326|loc="Theodosius I"}}

A number of Christian sources report that Eugenius cultivated the support of the pagan senators by promising to restore the altar of Victory and provide public funds for the maintenance of cults if they would support him and if he won the coming war against Theodosius.{{sfn|Williams|Friell|1995|p=130}} Cameron notes that the ultimate source for this is Ambrose's biographer [[Paulinus the Deacon]], whom he argues fabricated the entire narrative and deserves no credence.{{sfn|Cameron|pp=74–89}}{{sfn|Hebblewhite|loc=chapter 9}} Historian [[Michele R. Salzman|Michele Renee Salzman]] explains that "two newly relevant texts – John Chrysostom's Homily 6, ''adversus Catharos'' (PG 63: 491–492) and the ''Consultationes Zacchei et Apollonii'', re-dated to the 390s, reinforces the view that religion was not the key ideological element in the events at the time".<ref name="Michele Renee Salzman">{{cite journal |last1=Salzman |first1=Michele Renee |title=Ambrose and the Usurpation of Arbogastes and Eugenius: Reflections on Pagan-Christian Conflict Narratives |journal=Journal of Early Christian Studies |date=2010 |volume=18 |issue=2 |page=191 |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/383540/pdf |publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press|doi=10.1353/earl.0.0320 |s2cid=143665912 }}</ref> According to [[Maijastina Kahlos]], Finnish historian and Docent of Latin language and Roman literature at the University of Helsinki, the notion of pagan aristocrats united in a "heroic and cultured resistance" who rose up against the ruthless advance of Christianity in a final battle near Frigidus in 394 is a romantic myth.{{sfn|Kahlos|p=2}}