Page 292 - Envoys and Political Communication in the Late Antique West 411 - 533

Envoys and Political Communication,411–533

of imperial usage. 206 From the seventh century legatarius appears inter-
changeably with legatus in Frankish sources. 207
From the mid-sixth century also, the term apocrisiarius is firstat-
tested for representatives sent by the bishops of Rome, often for pro-
longed periods, to the imperial court in Constantinople. The title of this
office comes from Constantinopolitan chancellery usage. Apocrisiarius (or
responsalis) was a generic term for messengers, including agents dispatched
by senior magistrates to the imperial court, and by the patriarchs to
each other as well as to the court, to convey and bring back commu-
niqu´ es. Justinian legislated to restrict the number of episcopal apocrisiarii
at court; this perhaps had the effect of more distinctively restricting the
term to ‘registered’ agents, especially in the West. 208 By the second half
of the sixth century, it was conventional for papal apocrisiarii to reside
in Constantinople for substantial periods, to maintain on-going com-
munications with both the emperors and the patriarchs of the city, in-
structed by regular correspondence from Rome. Papal apocrisiarii resided
also at the imperial exarchate in Ravenna. 209 Several attested apocrisiarii
of the bishops of Rome subsequently became pope, including Vigilius,
Pelagius I, Gregory I, and Martin; some were installed by direct imperial

206
Ep. Austr., 18 (the Frankish king Theudebald to Justinian, 547) uses legatus,but legatarius is
used exclusively in 19 (the Frankish king Theudebert I to Justinian, c. 534–47), 25–39, 43–4,
46, 48 (ChildebertII and Brunhilda to Maurice), 42 (Maurice to Childebert), all 584 or later.
Ganshof, ‘Merowingisches Gesandschaftswesen’, 167–8.At Ep. Austr., 20, the term Visigothorum,
a Byzantine not a western usage, may be another Constantinopolitan influence on Frankish
diplomatic correspondence: Andrew Gillett, ‘Jordanes and Ablabius’, in Carl Deroux (ed.),
Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History x (Collection Latomus 254; Brussels, 2000), 482
n. 52.
Italian and Gallic writers: legatarius is not used by e.g. either Gregory the Great or Gregory of
Tours. The latter uses legatus interchangeably as both a second declension singular and a fourth
declension plural; examples of the latter include Hist. iv, 40; viii, 44 (both uses); ix, 1;cf.
M. Bonnet, Le Latin de Gr´ egoire de Tours (Paris, 1890; repr. Hildesheim, 1968), 355–9. Gregory
also uses both missus and nuntius, sometimes synonymously with legatus (e.g. v, 4; vi, 19; viii,
18; ix, 13), sometimes apparently with a distinction between a legatus undertaking negotiation,
a nuntius merely conveying a message (e.g. vi, 31,p. 300 line 5; vii, 24; ix, 18). Venantius
Fortunatus, Carm. xi, 1.28 (MGH AA 4.1), once uses legatarius (often spelt ligaturius) for a pun,
describing Christ delivered bound by Pilate to the Jewish judges: ligatus dominus,magis legatarius,
pax inter partes extitit.
207
Marculf, Formulae i, 11; Fredegar, Chron. ii, 58; iv, 31, 45, 51, 71, 73 (Fredegar uses legatarius
and legatus interchangeably; his plural for the former is legataries); Lex Ripuaria, 68.
208
Justinian, Nov. 6.2, 3; 123.25. J. Pargoire, ‘Apocrisaire’, Dictionnaire d’arch´ eologie chr´ etienne et de
liturgie i.2 (Paris, 1924), 2537–55, esp. 2537–47; O. Treitinger, ‘Apocrisiarius’, in Reallexikon f¨ ur
Antike und Christentum i (Stuttgart, 1950), 501–4.
209
Date: Pargoire, as for preceding note. The term does not appear in Liber pont. until the entry
for Silverius (536–7). The envoys of Pope Leo I, sometimes suggested as the first apocrisiarii
to the imperial court in Constantinople, are referred to only as legatii by Vigilius in his letter
to Justinian on the Three Chapters, Collectio Avellana, 83.285. Instructions: Gregory the Great,
Registrum epistolarum ix, 187, 189, 237; ix, 29 (Gregory refers to his responsales in numerous letters
to other recipients, e.g. iii, 7, 64; v, 39, 44; vii, 27; viii, 11).
266