The Official Histories of Constantine Porphyrogenitus

Abstract

The reign of Romanus I Lecapenus (920-44), although it was a time of growing prosperity and military success, apparently failed to attract contemporary historians. A poorly educated man of humble origins, Romanus had little interest in patronizing literature. Potential historians, who typically preferred not to record a reign until they knew how it would end, faced problems under Romanus even if they wanted to record earlier times. His predecessor was Constantine VII (913-20), whom Romanus had displaced as both senior emperor and heir apparent after he made his own eldest son, Christopher, the ranking junior emperor. Yet Constantine still held the imperial title. He was married to Romanus’ daughter, had crowned Romanus in the first place, and had an hereditary right to the throne, even after he was declared a bastard when his father’s fourth marriage was condemned. He also enjoyed enough popular support that he was eventually able to take power. Thus contemporary historians risked Romanus’ displeasure if they wrote about Constantine and his dynasty too favorably but also if they wrote too unfavorably, or indeed if they wrote anything at all that reminded readers of Romanus’ ambiguous situation. While the aging maverick Nicetas the Paphlagonian could ignore such concerns when he wrote in retirement around 921, any ambitious writer in Constantinople had to contend with them. Only after Constantine’s restoration as senior emperor in 945 did aspiring historians know where they stood.