Page 210 - Envoys and Political Communication in the Late Antique West 411 - 533

Envoys and Political Communication,411–533

category, alongside those to high officials and to humillimi, to be imitated
by his bureaucratic heirs. 27 For letters of appointment and other recur-
ring occasions, Cassiodorus provides both the formulae of Books vi and vii
and the actual letters of many individuals’ elevations. No formula could
be provided for diplomatic correspondence, but by deleting the detail
of the envoys’ names, Cassiodorus took a step towards removing the let-
ters from their historical context, making them timeless stylistic models. 28
Notwithstanding their distinctive features, the diplomatic letters are
integrated into the body of the Variae, in rough conformity with the
broad chronological sequence of the collection, rather than gathered into
a separate book. Many are closely related in topic or circumstance with
their adjacent letters. The letters to the Burgundian and Frankish kings
which conclude the first two books are preceded by the famous letters to
Boethius, requesting his aid in preparing suitable gifts to be given to the
respective kings, and digressing indulgently on the subjects of engineering
and music. 29 Two letters to western kings at the beginning of Book iv,
sealing alliances, are followed by a pair of letters elevating a court servant
30
to high rank as a reward for his services as an envoy. Athalaric’s letter to
Justin opening Book viii is the first of a series announcing his accession in
526. The eight letters are arranged in descending order of rank, from the
31
emperor and the Roman Senate to outlying provincials. The final four
letters of Book x are also a series, concerning Vitigis’ appeal to Justinian
for peace, introduced by a letter to the emperor; again, precedence of rank
32
is observed. Cassiodorus highlights his letters to rulers, but intersperses

27 Cass., Variae,Praef ., 17. Similar collections of real diplomatic correspondence have been produced
in modern times to serve as stylistic models: Charles de Martens, Manuel diplomatique (Paris, 1822),
chap. 10: ‘Des compositions diplomatiques’, 174–93, ‘Actes et offices diplomatiques’, 195–575;
ErnestSetow, A Guide to Diplomatic Practice, 4th edn, ed. Nevile Bland (New York, 1957), chap. 7:
‘The Language of Diplomatic Intercourse and Forms of Documents’, 57–77. On these and other
modern works: Gordon A. Craig, ‘On the Nature of Diplomatic History: the Relevance of Some
Old Books’, in P. G. Lauren (ed.), Diplomacy: New Approaches in History,Theory,and Policy (New
York and London, 1979), 21–42.
28
On ille as part of the formulaic nature of the Variae: Mommsen, Prooemium to Cass., Variae,
xxiii–xxiv; followed by Fridh, Terminologie et formules, 2; O’Donnell, Cassiodorus, 93; Barnish,
Introduction to Cassiodorus: Variae, xviii.
There is no evidence to support the suggestion of Peter, Der Brief , 205–6 (followed by
Krautschick, Cassiodor, 43), that the use of ille indicates that Cassiodorus compiled his collection
from personal draft copies, written before the envoys were appointed; the use of ille and tot in
other types of letters, including rescripts, indicates that the words are deletions from the originals.
Formula of royal correspondence: though cf. Marculf, Formulae i, 10 (a general greeting of
friendship).
29 30
Cass., Variae i, 45–6; ii, 40–1. Cass., Variae iv, 1–4 (Senarius); see below.
31
Cass., Variae viii, 1–8. Cf. the letters announcing the accession of Amalasuntha and Theodahad:
x, 1–4.
32
Cass., Variae x, 32–5. For a comparable series of diplomatic letters, dispatched simultaneously to
a descending order of officials, cf. Ep. Austr., 25–39 (580s).
184