is it non-historical for Adelheid to be a mean/jealous mother-in-law?
Honestly, we don't know. There's one contemporary chronicler, Odilo of Clurry, who says Adelheid and Theophanu did not get along (which made their later team-up so surprising), though of course the others, writing during the regency and later in Otto III's reign, would also have a vested interest in presenting them as harmonious. If you wanat to see the two women as hostile, you can also make an educated guess from Adelheid remaining in Italy most of the time during Theophanu's life time, and rarely venturing beyond the alps for co-hosting a diet, but then again, this makes total political sense - Adelheid was the one with the Italian connections, who knew all the power players and kept them in line! So basically, anything from "disliked each other intensely" to "tolerated each other" to "got along fine" is possible. But of course, in a novel you need drama and obstacles to overcome, so I wasn't exactly surprised that Adelheid was presented as an antagonist of Theophanu's pre Otto II's death. However, note that the novel omits as characters both her daughter Mathilde, the abbess of Quedlinburg, who in fact will play an important role in Operation Save Little Otto And the Regency and her daughter Emma (from her first marriage) - omitting the later, as said in the afterword with an apology, also ommitts an important reason for the possible temporary fallout between Otto II and Adelheid, because Emma was married to King Lothar of France. Her brother-in-law Charles accused her of adultery with a bishop; both Emma and the bishop were cleared of the suspicion in front of a diet, but if they hadn't been, Emma could have died. (Or at the very least ended up imprisoned.) Charles fled to, drumroll, Otto II's court, and this according to the podcast version was one very likely reason why Adelheid left for Burgundy. Judith Tarr, like I said, mentions this in the afterword too, but by leaving this out, and showing Adelheid as a mother exclusively in the context of being dominating and jealous vis a vis Otto II of course makes a deliberate characterisation choice. If she'd been shown getting along well with her daughters, and being protective about one of them, she would have been a more sympathetic character even before the big turnaround.
Did Otto II really send Adelheid to Burgundy like in the book? (This may have been one of the podcast things I missed.)
She did leave for Burgundy. The podcast has this being her choice, not Otto's, and likely in anger over the Emma-Charles matter. What annoyed me more is that she's presented as having been in leage with Henry the Quarrelsome at this point, which, no, I don't think anyone ever said she was. It also causes a slight continuity problem because later in the novel Adelheid says Henry just isn't capable of being Emperor (as opposed to local ruler of a fiefdom), so firstly, if novel!Adelheid thought and knew this, why did she support him earlier, and secondly, no matter how angry she is about Theophanu's influence, Otto II is her legacy. If Henry got on the throne, the dynasty Adelheid just founded with Otto the Great would have been dead upon arrival. No way.
Wait, remind me, what do people now think of Byzantine Empress Theophano and the likelihood she arranged the murder of Emperor Nikopheros?
With the caveat that "people" is Anthony Kalldellis and Robin the "History of Byzantium" podcaster, the thing is, John I. Tsimitzikes needed a scapegoat, immediately, so the Patriarch of Constantinople would crown him. So blaming Theophano came in handy. Also, years later, when Theophano's son Basil finally became Emperor in fact and not just in name, he had to duke it out with the Phokas family first, with Bardas Phokas, specifically, who was another nephew of Nikepheros Phokas. Since the Phokas family hardly could deny Basil was in fact the rightful Emperor, son of Romanos, grandson of Constantine, already crowned as a toddler (he'd been Emperor in name through the reigns of both Nikepheros and John; officially, they were co-Emperors; in fact, the main reason why Theophano married Nikepheros was to assure her sons would remain alive and would get a chance at ruling, because you have to recall Nikepheros was an incredibly popular general who'd scored major victories, and he would have become Emperor at this point in all likelihood no matter what, but if it had been through an coup and an usurpation, chances were little Basil and Constantine would have ended up castrated at best, dead at worst). But the Phokas could wage a propaganda war through presenting Basil's mother as this evil low born woman and adultress who'd organized the murder of their guy. (Especially since Basil did have his mother brought back from the island/monastery into which she'd been banished once he had rid himself of the last co-regent and assumed power himself. He was standing by Mom, in other words, and she died in the palace.) Leo the Deacon, the main source for blaming Theophano, was writing in the Basil versus the Phokas family fights.
None of this means Theophano couldn't have been complicit, mind. The graphic novel I recently read did have her co-organizing the death, but it also gave her sympathetic motivations - not only is Nikepheros a great general but a lousy Emperor who manages to go from folk military hero to hated by almost everyone in just a few years because he has no idea of how to do anything but leading armies, he's also intending to make his family, the Phokas clan, the next dynasty, renege on his promise and get rid of Theophano's sons, so she simply strikes first. (And then finds herself double crossed by John Tsimitzikes and Basil Lekapantos the Eunuch, but the later does promise to keep her sons alive, as they are also his nephews.) It's another case of "we just don't know", due to less than reliable sources.
I got the impression from the podcast that Otto the Great was less great than he was sort of going around making unforced errors but was also really, really lucky. Whereas this book seems to buy in to the "great" part.
Yep. I guess that's another thing that happens if your sources come from the 1960s. As Mildred said, Otto proves that more than one German ruler called "the Great" could have been the defeated instead if he'd been less lucky at key points in his reign. :) (Otto definitely had his shares of miracles of the House of , well, not Brandenburg.)
I also got the impression from the podcast that the odds were good Theophanu might have been sent back or sent to a convent or otherwise disposed of, and that she was likely to have been terrified, whereas this Theophanu is all "cool! I'm gonna be HRE!"
Not least because of the possible birthdates for Theophanu, Judith Tarr chooses the oldest - which makes her 18 when she marries - while the podcast and for that matter other sources go with the youngest, which makes her 13 to 14 years age when she comes to Italy. Plus, again, completely different background. If Theophanu is 14 years old and NOT born to the purple, if her best claim to royalty is being the niece of a recent ursurper, John, then she is most likely scared of being sent back, no matter how brave a face she puts on things. If Theophanu is 18 and the daughter of Emperor Romanos II, well, she has a completely different standing and not much to fear, even if she was born before Romanos became Emperor (but when he was an Emperor's son). She can count on being very much wanted by the Ottonians.
Re: Eagle's Daughter
Honestly, we don't know. There's one contemporary chronicler, Odilo of Clurry, who says Adelheid and Theophanu did not get along (which made their later team-up so surprising), though of course the others, writing during the regency and later in Otto III's reign, would also have a vested interest in presenting them as harmonious. If you wanat to see the two women as hostile, you can also make an educated guess from Adelheid remaining in Italy most of the time during Theophanu's life time, and rarely venturing beyond the alps for co-hosting a diet, but then again, this makes total political sense - Adelheid was the one with the Italian connections, who knew all the power players and kept them in line! So basically, anything from "disliked each other intensely" to "tolerated each other" to "got along fine" is possible. But of course, in a novel you need drama and obstacles to overcome, so I wasn't exactly surprised that Adelheid was presented as an antagonist of Theophanu's pre Otto II's death. However, note that the novel omits as characters both her daughter Mathilde, the abbess of Quedlinburg, who in fact will play an important role in Operation Save Little Otto And the Regency and her daughter Emma (from her first marriage) - omitting the later, as said in the afterword with an apology, also ommitts an important reason for the possible temporary fallout between Otto II and Adelheid, because Emma was married to King Lothar of France. Her brother-in-law Charles accused her of adultery with a bishop; both Emma and the bishop were cleared of the suspicion in front of a diet, but if they hadn't been, Emma could have died. (Or at the very least ended up imprisoned.) Charles fled to, drumroll, Otto II's court, and this according to the podcast version was one very likely reason why Adelheid left for Burgundy. Judith Tarr, like I said, mentions this in the afterword too, but by leaving this out, and showing Adelheid as a mother exclusively in the context of being dominating and jealous vis a vis Otto II of course makes a deliberate characterisation choice. If she'd been shown getting along well with her daughters, and being protective about one of them, she would have been a more sympathetic character even before the big turnaround.
Did Otto II really send Adelheid to Burgundy like in the book? (This may have been one of the podcast things I missed.)
She did leave for Burgundy. The podcast has this being her choice, not Otto's, and likely in anger over the Emma-Charles matter. What annoyed me more is that she's presented as having been in leage with Henry the Quarrelsome at this point, which, no, I don't think anyone ever said she was. It also causes a slight continuity problem because later in the novel Adelheid says Henry just isn't capable of being Emperor (as opposed to local ruler of a fiefdom), so firstly, if novel!Adelheid thought and knew this, why did she support him earlier, and secondly, no matter how angry she is about Theophanu's influence, Otto II is her legacy. If Henry got on the throne, the dynasty Adelheid just founded with Otto the Great would have been dead upon arrival. No way.
Wait, remind me, what do people now think of Byzantine Empress Theophano and the likelihood she arranged the murder of Emperor Nikopheros?
With the caveat that "people" is Anthony Kalldellis and Robin the "History of Byzantium" podcaster, the thing is, John I. Tsimitzikes needed a scapegoat, immediately, so the Patriarch of Constantinople would crown him. So blaming Theophano came in handy. Also, years later, when Theophano's son Basil finally became Emperor in fact and not just in name, he had to duke it out with the Phokas family first, with Bardas Phokas, specifically, who was another nephew of Nikepheros Phokas. Since the Phokas family hardly could deny Basil was in fact the rightful Emperor, son of Romanos, grandson of Constantine, already crowned as a toddler (he'd been Emperor in name through the reigns of both Nikepheros and John; officially, they were co-Emperors; in fact, the main reason why Theophano married Nikepheros was to assure her sons would remain alive and would get a chance at ruling, because you have to recall Nikepheros was an incredibly popular general who'd scored major victories, and he would have become Emperor at this point in all likelihood no matter what, but if it had been through an coup and an usurpation, chances were little Basil and Constantine would have ended up castrated at best, dead at worst). But the Phokas could wage a propaganda war through presenting Basil's mother as this evil low born woman and adultress who'd organized the murder of their guy. (Especially since Basil did have his mother brought back from the island/monastery into which she'd been banished once he had rid himself of the last co-regent and assumed power himself. He was standing by Mom, in other words, and she died in the palace.) Leo the Deacon, the main source for blaming Theophano, was writing in the Basil versus the Phokas family fights.
None of this means Theophano couldn't have been complicit, mind. The graphic novel I recently read did have her co-organizing the death, but it also gave her sympathetic motivations - not only is Nikepheros a great general but a lousy Emperor who manages to go from folk military hero to hated by almost everyone in just a few years because he has no idea of how to do anything but leading armies, he's also intending to make his family, the Phokas clan, the next dynasty, renege on his promise and get rid of Theophano's sons, so she simply strikes first. (And then finds herself double crossed by John Tsimitzikes and Basil Lekapantos the Eunuch, but the later does promise to keep her sons alive, as they are also his nephews.) It's another case of "we just don't know", due to less than reliable sources.
I got the impression from the podcast that Otto the Great was less great than he was sort of going around making unforced errors but was also really, really lucky. Whereas this book seems to buy in to the "great" part.
Yep. I guess that's another thing that happens if your sources come from the 1960s. As Mildred said, Otto proves that more than one German ruler called "the Great" could have been the defeated instead if he'd been less lucky at key points in his reign. :) (Otto definitely had his shares of miracles of the House of , well, not Brandenburg.)
I also got the impression from the podcast that the odds were good Theophanu might have been sent back or sent to a convent or otherwise disposed of, and that she was likely to have been terrified, whereas this Theophanu is all "cool! I'm gonna be HRE!"
Not least because of the possible birthdates for Theophanu, Judith Tarr chooses the oldest - which makes her 18 when she marries - while the podcast and for that matter other sources go with the youngest, which makes her 13 to 14 years age when she comes to Italy. Plus, again, completely different background. If Theophanu is 14 years old and NOT born to the purple, if her best claim to royalty is being the niece of a recent ursurper, John, then she is most likely scared of being sent back, no matter how brave a face she puts on things. If Theophanu is 18 and the daughter of Emperor Romanos II, well, she has a completely different standing and not much to fear, even if she was born before Romanos became Emperor (but when he was an Emperor's son). She can count on being very much wanted by the Ottonians.