Though Theodoric himself only used the title 'king' (rex), some scholars characterize him as a Western Roman Emperor in all but name,[c] since he ruled a large part of the former Western Roman Empire described as a Res Publica, had received the former Western imperial regalia from Constantinople in 497 which he used, was referred to by the imperial title princeps by the Italian aristocracy and exercised imperial powers recognized in the East, such as naming consuls.As a young child of an Ostrogothic nobleman, Theodoric was taken as a hostage to Constantinople, where he spent his formative years and received an East Roman education (paideia).

Theodoric returned to Pannonia around 470, and throughout the 470s he campaigned against the Sarmatians and competed for influence among the Goths of the Roman Balkans, gaining recognition as King in 471.

Theodoric was born in AD 454 in Pannonia on the banks of the Neusiedler See near Carnuntum, the son of king Theodemir, a Germanic Amali nobleman, and his concubine Ereleuva.

To this end, historian Hans-Ulrich Wiemer states that, "Theodoric’s childhood was spent at a time of violent conflicts between non-Roman groups attempting to fill the power vacuum created by the collapse of Attila’s empire".

[6] In 461, when Theodoric was seven or eight years of age, he was taken hostage in Constantinople to secure the Ostrogoths' compliance with a treaty Theodemir had concluded with the augustus Leo I (ruled 457–474).

[9] His status made him valuable, since the Amal family from which he came (as told by Theodoric),[10] allegedly ruled half of all Goths since the third century AD.

Historian Peter Heather argues that Theodoric's claims were likely self-aggrandizing propaganda and that the Amal dynasty was more limited than modern commentators presume.

Not long afterwards near Singidunum (modern Belgrade) in upper Moesia, the Tisza Sarmatian king Babai had extended his authority at Constantinople's expense.

Enraged by this betrayal, Theodoric turned his wrath against the communities in the Rhodope Mountains, where his forces commandeered livestock and slaughtered peasants, sacked and burned Stobi in Macedonia and requisitioned supplies from the archbishop at Heraclea.

Bad luck, rebellions and poor decisions left Zeno in an unfortunate position,[e] which subsequently led him to seek another agreement with Theodoric.

In 483, Zeno made Theodoric magister militum praesentalis[24] and consul designate in 484, whereby he commanded the Danubian provinces of Dacia Ripensis and Moesia Inferior as well as the adjacent regions.

[30] Theodoric's army was defeated by Odoacer's forces at Faenza in 490, but regained the upper hand after securing victory in the Battle of the Adda River on 11 August 490.

[38] He visited Rome in 500 where he stayed for 6 months and held games in the Circus, probably also in the Colosseum, and renewed the grain largesse to the Roman populace, which had perhaps been interrupted since the days of Odoacer.

[35] Theodoric became regent for the infant Visigothic king, his grandson Amalaric, following the defeat of Alaric II by the Franks under Clovis in 507.

[45] Like Odoacer, Theodoric was ostensibly only a viceroy for the augustus in Constantinople, but he nonetheless adopted the trappings of imperial style, increasingly emphasizing his "neo-imperial status".

[48] Chroniclers like Cassiodorus added a layer of legitimacy for Theodoric and the Amal tribe from which he came by casting them as cooperative participants in the greater history of the Mediterranean dating back to the era of Alexander the Great.

[52] The new augustus, Justin I—who replaced Anastasius, a man with whom Theodoric had good relations—was under the influence of his nephew Justinian; somehow, imperial views hardened against the West and talk of Rome's fall emerged during this period, leading to questions about the legitimacy of barbarian rule.

[60] The subsequent campaigns into Italy by Justinian—whose long reign from 527 to 565 delineates the transition from "antiquity to the Middle Ages in the Latin West" according to historian Michael Kulikowski—wrought the final blows to Theodoric's once dominant kingdom.

[76] Historian Jonathan J. Arnold quips: Northern cities like Ravenna, Verona, Pavia, Milan, Parma, Como, Aquileia, and still others received new or improved walls, palaces, aqueducts, churches, baths, and a host of other impressive and glorious buildings, all reiterating to their respective inhabitants their own importance within a newly revived and reinvigorated Roman Empire and connecting such ideas with the intervention of a caring and devoted princeps, Theodoric.

Unlike all the other contemporary buildings in Ravenna, which were made of brick, the Mausoleum of Theodoric was built completely from fine quality stone ashlars.

[87] Possibly as a reference to the Goths' tradition of an origin in Scandinavia, the architect decorated the frieze with a pattern found in 5th- and 6th-century Scandinavian metal adornments.

[73] The Senate's Curia, the Theatre of Pompey, the city aqueducts, sewers and a granary were refurbished and repaired and statues were set up in the Flavian Amphitheatre.

Boethius was a Roman aristocrat and Christian humanist, who was also a philosopher, poet, theologian, mathematician, astronomer, translator and commentator on Aristotle and other Greek luminaries.

[95] Seeking to restore the glory of ancient Rome, Theodoric ruled Italy during one of its most peaceful and prosperous periods and was accordingly hailed as a new Trajan and Valentinian I for his building efforts and his religious toleration.

The 13th century Norse Þiðreks saga, based on lost Low German sources, moves the location of Dietrich's life to Westphalia and northern Germany.

One scholar, Jonathan J. Arnold, advocates that this nature changed during the course of the 6th century; Arnold alludes to local and contemporary sources such as Magnus Felix Ennodius's Vita beatissimi viri Epiphani episcopi Ticinensis ecclesiae, Cassiodorus's Variae and Laudes or the Pars Posterior of the Anonymus Valesianus, arguing therefrom that Rome in the West did not fall in 476, but merely awaited a "proper Roman emperor to rule it".

[103] According to Arnold, these two sources ultimately reveal that Theodoric was actually viewed both by the Italian nobility and the Eastern court in Constantinople as a legitimate Western Roman emperor.

[104] Arnold built his case on the fact that Theodoric widely used the title of princeps for himself, and employed the term Res Publica to describe the domain he ruled.

[109] He further states that this vision of Theodoric's position fails to address the duality of his rule; namely, having to retain the loyalty of both Romans and Goths alike.

[111] Wiemer also avows that the Eastern court never formally acknowledged Theodoric as a Western Emperor, a necessary condition to become one, the last of which ever recognized by Constantinople being Julius Nepos, who died in 480.