Page 273 - Envoys and Political Communication in the Late Antique West 411 - 533

Negotium agendum

empire or its former territories adopted the custom of sending letters
to validate their dispatched representatives when dealing with imperial
representatives or their successors, using Latin as a common language
of diplomacy. 119 Diplomatic letters, as well as introducing the matter of
negotiation, acted as letters of credence for the envoys named in their
text. The act of accepting a proffered letter from the envoy’s principal
perhaps constituted the licentia for the legate to address the ruler in full. 120
Sometimes, however, separate letters of credence were also written, to
be presented alongside or in lieu of a letter addressing the matter of the
embassy. 121 Ennodius’ omission of letters is perhaps intended to focus
attention on Epiphanius’ oratory; his principals’ letters could suggest an
alternative source of persuasion.
Ennodius’ formulaic presentation of the audience as consisting essen-
tially of two speeches, the envoy’s oration and the ruler’s reply, appears
to be an accurate rather than stylised description of common practice, at
least for initial meetings. De ceremoniis too portrays the audience as con-
sisting of a petition and reply; Procopius, who regularly presents embassy
narratives as speech and reply, has a Roman envoy on behalf of Vitigis
seek dispensation from Belisarius to discuss matters in the format of a
dialogue rather than in the conventional oration and reply. 122 Doubtless,
much depended on the groundwork laid during preliminary meetings
between the envoys and court officials, and on subsequentdiscussions,
whether further formal audiences in the ruler’s consistorium or informal
settings such as convivia. The fifth- and sixth-century sections of De cer-
emoniis,however,notetheemperor’soptiontohold extempore discussions

rogans et confessionibus sanctorum apostolorum Petri et Pauli vestrum regnum commendans . . .’); 158
( = Hormisdas, Indiculus of 519), 4 (cui [imperatori] praesentati salutantes litteras nostras offerte,
suggerentes); Gregory of Tours, Hist. viii, 13 (Felix legatus,salutatione praemissa,ostensis litteris,
ait).
119 CTh xii, 12.5. Second- and fourth-century examples in Elton, Roman Warfare in Europe, 186
and n. 28; Linda Ellis, ‘Dacians, Sarmatians, and Goths on the Roman–Carpathian Frontier:
Second–Fourth Centuries’, in Ralph W. Mathisen and Hagith S. Sivan (eds.), Shifting Frontiers in
Late Antiquity (Aldershot, 1996), 118. Both Attila and his leading chiefs had secretaries to prepare
Latin and perhaps Greek letters to the emperors, prizing ‘literary skills’; Priscus, Fr., 11.2, 14
(Fr. Class. Hist., 263, 289). Procopius, Wars viii, 19.8, comments on the Utrigar Huns as being
exceptional in not using letters. Cass., Variae iv, 1 and v, 1, responses to friendly embassies from
the kings of the Thuringians and Warni, mention the receipt of gifts and envoys (iv, 1.3), but
do not specify letters.
120
Letter of credence: e.g. Priscus, Fr., 11.2 (letter of Theodosius II to Attila establishes the rank of
the envoy Maximinus; Fr. Class. Hist., 247). Licentia: note Collectio Avellana, 116.5–7 (insistance
of Hormisdas that his envoys pass their letter to the emperor Anastasius before answering any
questions).
121
E.g. Ep. Wisigotica, 4; Marculf, Formulae i, 9.
122
Procopius, Wars vi, 6.11–13. Cf. Blockley, History of Menander for the possible historicity of the
speeches and replies in Menander’s account.
247