History
354U: Early Medieval Europe, 300-1000
Portland State University
Prof. John Ott (c) 2020, 2021
Reading
Guide 9:
Week X: Liudprand of Cremona, Embassy to Constantinople
(969/70)
Introduction to source
Liudprand, the bishop of Cremona
(northern Italy, southeast of Milan), was born into a prominent Pavian family
of diplomats and nobles, and was raised at the Italian courts of kings Hugh
of Burgundy (926-947) and then Berengar II of Ivrea (950-961). After serving the royal courts in various capacities
as a scribe, singer, and diplomat, and undertaking his first embassy to
Constantinople, Liudprand was, for reasons still unclear, sent into exile
to the court of Otto I about 950-1. Little is known
of his activities until his return to Italy in Otto's entourage in
962.
He went on his second diplomatic mission at the
behest of the Emperor Otto I and the empress Adelaide, in order to arrange for the marriage
of Otto's son, the future king Otto II (r. 973-983) and the daughter of
the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus II Phocas (r. 963-969). Nicephorus was
a fairly formidable adversary. An active and skilled military campaigner,
notably in southern Italy, Sicily, and Cyprus, he had seized power from the
existing imperial dynasty, and was keeping the two young sons of his predecessor
at his court (Liudprand refers to them as 'the two small emperors' in c.
3). He also had married his predecessor's widow.
Liudprand's mission was a diplomatic failure; he spent 120 days in Byzantium,
leaving on October 2. His return journey took several more months. (Ocean
travel in the Mediterranean could be quite hazardous, and no overland route
was open at this time.) Once back, he wrote
and perhaps revised his report after December 969, the death-date of Nicephorus.
Thus, it is possible that his report was not immediately delivered, or at
least committed to writing. It is worth noting that Liudprand does
reveal a certain affinity for the Greeks elsewhere in his writing, and the
sense that Greek and Latin Christians faced a common threat in the Mediterranean from Muslim adventurers and privateers,
one that had made sea travel hazardous, certainly existed.
Questions
(1) Liudprand's attitude toward the Byzantine emperor and his court --
and toward the Greeks generally -- is quite hostile. What does he criticize,
and why? Is there a strategy to his criticism, or is he simply expressing
deep-seated personal prejudice? Or both? What does he pay attention to?
(2) Conversely, how does Liudprand characterize the Emperor Nicephorus'
complaints about Liudprand's master, the German king and emperor Otto I? (Note
that Otto I's coronation as emperor occurred in 962, in Rome, so roughly seven
years before Liudprand's embassy.) How did the emperor and his court view
the city of Rome? the pope? Otto's claims to be Rome's lord?
(3) Liudprand did not share his letter with the emperor until, it seems,
a good time after his return to central Europe. Why might he have held onto
this letter? How does the letter's purpose and intended audience complicate
our analysis of its reliability as a historical source?