Some Conclusions - 2

The crypt, Santa Eulalia de Bóveda near Lugo, Galicia.

Murals from the time of Priscillian. Possibly a pagan temple later adapted for Christian worship?

The years around the time of Priscillian were a critical period for the Roman empire. This would account for some of the actions and reactions of various bishops as they sought 'to keep in with' the secular authorities. Ambrose as bishop of Milan was especially vulnerable to the machinations of Maximus! A brief summary of the changes of this period may be helpful.
  
After the death of the emperor Valentinian I in 375 the Roman empire was politically unstable! Eventually it was divided between Gratian (Gaul, Spain and Britain), Valentinian II aged 4 (Italy, part of Illyricum, and Africa) and Theodosius I (the Eastern empire). In reality Gratian still held overall responsibility.
In 383 the commander of Britain, Magnus Maximus (Macsen Wledig), was proclaimed emperor by his troops. He went to Gaul to pursue his imperial ambitions, taking a large number of the British garrison troops with him.

Following his landing in Gaul, Maximus went out to meet his main opponent, emperor Gratian, whom he defeated near Paris. Gratian, after fleeing, was killed at Lyon on August 25, 383. Continuing his campaign into Italy, Maximus was stopped from overthrowing Valentinian II, who was aged only twelve, when Theodosius I, the Eastern Roman Emperor, sent Flavius Bauto with a powerful force to stop him. Negotiations followed in 384 including the intervention of Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, leading to an accord with Valentinian II and Theodosius I in which Maximus was recognized as Augustus in the west.

Maximus made his capital at Augusta Treverorum (Treves, Trier) in Gaul, and ruled Britain, Gaul, Spain and Africa

In 387 Maximus managed to force the young emperor, Valentinian II, out of Milan, after which the boy fled to Theodosius I. Theodosius I and Valentinian II then invaded from the east and Maximus was defeated in the Battle of the Save, surrendered in Aquileia, and although he pleaded for mercy was executed.

The death of Maximus led to a change of fortune for the Priscillianists. They obtained permission to bring the bodies of the 'martyrs' back to Galicia, and for a time the relics were valued and oaths were sworn at Priscillian's shrine.(1) The ordinary folk of Galicia felt that their leaders "had been the victims of a judicial murder". (2)
Not only that but the panegyrist, Pacatus Drepanius, praised Theodosius for his victory over the 'wicked usurper' who was guilty of torturing and killing miserable men and women "on a charge of excessive religion and too diligent a worship of the divinity"(2).
In Galicia, Priscillianism seems to have been the dominant form of Christianity between A.D.388 and the Council of Toledo in A.D.400. Chadwick notes that:-  "Some time in the nineties perhaps about 396, the bishops of the Spanish provinces other than Galicia invited their colleagues of the north-west to come to a synod at Toledo there to give an undertaking no longer to commemorate the Priscillianists as martyrs."(3)

Needless to say, the Galicians refused. Even the elderly Symposius who was still the bishop of Astorga, and had always been quietly sympathetic to Priscillian, was unable to go against the popular feeling. Chadwick records that Symposius visited Milan to ask for communion with Ambrose. The conditions laid down by Ambrose were acceptable to Symposius but not to the clergy and laity back home in Galicia! (4)  They insisted on a continued commemoration of the Martyrs of Trier and at least one "orthodox" bishop (Ortygius of Aquis Celenis) was driven from his see by the synod of the province. Certainly up to the Council of Toledo in A.D.400, the province of Galicia was predominantly Priscillianist. (5)


(1) Sulpicius Severus. Chron. ii. 51. 5 - 8
(2) Chadwick. p. 150 - quoting Pacatus. Paneg. xii. 29
(3) Opp. cit. p. 152 see footnote.
(4) Opp. cit. p. 153
(5) Opp. cit. p. 157