Page 206 - Envoys and Political Communication in the Late Antique West 411 - 533

Envoys and Political Communication,411–533

Table 2 (cont.)

X 26 Theodahad to Justinian
X 32 Vitigis to Justinian
X 33 Vitigis to (eastern) magister officiorum a
X 34 Vitigis to episcopis suis a
X 35 Vitigis to (eastern) praetorian prefect a
XI and XII Letters in Cassiodorus’ own name as praetorian prefect, containing no
b
diplomatic letters (though note xi 13 )

a Letters of credence for the envoys carrying x32.
b Variae xi, 13 (in the name of the Senate of Rome to Justinian, seeking to prevent the
outbreak of hostilities between Constantinople and Italy) is not treated as diplomatic
correspondence by Cassiodorus’ editorial principles, for itis notgiven any significant
placing in Book xi. As the letter was included in Book xi, notBook x,it waswritten
by Cassiodorus in the capacity of praetorian prefect, not quaestor to Theodahad, and was
therefore not regarded by Cassiodorus as a communication from a ruler either in form
or origin.
Earlier correspondence between eastern emperors and the Senate of Rome during
Ostrogothic rule: Collectio Avellana, 113, 114,a. 516.

balance of imperial and royal addressees mustarise from Cassiodorus’ con-
scious selection, not from the impress of events. The years of Cassiodorus’
firsttenure as quaestor in the late 500s were a period of conflictand recon-
ciliation with Byzantium, as Constantinople under Anastasius encouraged
Frankish disruption of Theoderic’s network of western alliances, and dis-
patched naval forces against Italy. Resolution cannot have been reached
without the aid of many more letters sent from Theoderic’s court than
14
the two preserved by Cassiodorus. Similarly, the breakdown of relations
between Italy and Constantinople under Justinian and the consequential
outbreak of war, straddled by Cassiodorus’ times in office as magister offi-
ciorum and praetorian prefect of Italy in the mid-530s, was accompanied
by negotiations with other western powers – including the Franks, the
Burgundians, the Goths in Spain, and the Vandals – of which there is no
trace in the Variae. The distribution of imperial and royal letters in the
Variae is unlikely to reflect the proportions of letters originally written.
Nor does the division of mostly royal diplomatic letters in the early books,
and exclusively imperial letters in Book x, represent any simple thematic
emphasis, such as a division between Theoderic’s good rule, accompa-
nied by peaceful negotiations, in the earlier books, and the domestic and
15
international crises of the monarchs of Book x. Theoderic’s ultimately
14 15
Variae i, 1 and ii, 1. Suggested by O’Donnell, Cassiodorus, 80.
180