The material presented here shows that Liudprand was interested in writing a far more different thing than modern historians want to find in the chronicles. He legitimized the Ottonians as future rulers of all of Europe that is in his text an Empire. This was done on many levels. First the dynasty acquired the rule of the kingdom from the hands of great King – Conrad I – and then the rulers were able to bring peace throughout the kingdom. Liudprand writes with an awareness of the broader picture. The East Frankish kingdom and Ottonian achievements are confronted with the failures of other rulers, who are unable to make peace. The same goes with the Hungarian attacks. Liudprand presents them as an Enemy on a European scale. They attack all kingdoms and easily raid them. They are unstoppable both because of their own qualities as well as the weakness of the Europeans. Their fighting between themselves and lack of morality marks the Europeans as sinful and therefore righteously losing against their enemies. The Hungarians are God's scourge, just like the Muslims in Fraxinetum and in Africa. The ability to defeat these enemies marks the Ottonians as the defenders of Europe, Christianity and as such the Emperors of Europe. In a situation where no one else is able to act, they are those who do what is needed. Finally, the emperor needs to have a visible sign of his rule. When Antapodosis was written, the Ottonians were mere kings, yet they acted as emperors. Therefore, even if ultimately the Imperial crown was not put on Otto's brow, he would be a real emperor, while rulers of Byzantium were emperors only in name.

This highly ideological approach does not mean that his work should be dismissed as a collection of fables and anecdotes, as scholars have sometimes done. The aim of Antapodosis and the way in which it was written does not make it different from other chronicles of the time. When Liudprand's text is compared to Widukind’s, the difference is not in the latter being more reliable, or that he wrote facts instead of fables. Both authors wrote what is here called myths. These narratives are influenced by the meanings and signs that shape the story they present.