Teodosio I sigue siendo Teodosio I

Abstract

The present article tries to demostrate that the recent suggestion made by J. Meischner about the missorium of Theodosius from de Royal Academy of History in Madrid, in the sense that it is an object representing not Theodosius I (traditional identification) but Theodosius II, and therefore, a product from the Court of Ravenna, made in the year 421, is unnaceptable and unconvincing. The new proposal does not solve the different problems raised by the iconographic, epigraphic, and historical context of the object. One of them, and the most important, is the mention in the missorium of the decennalia of the emperor, that should correspond necessarially to the one celebrated for Theodosius I in the year 388 and not for Theodosius II. Should be this the case then, the inscription will celebrate 10 years later, the decennalia that we know for certain that took place in the year 411 as attested in the Chronica of Marcellinus. Some other observations, historical and iconographical, assure that the traditional identification of Theodosius I in the missorium, should be maintained. Theodosius the first continues being Theodosius I.