William of Apulia, a Norman historian who wrote in the 1090s, mentions Nikephoros during his account of Robert Guiscard's invasion of the Byzantine Empire in 1081; as a foreigner he was removed from the court politics of the Byzantine Empire, and thus provides a fair and objective view of Nikephoros. Nikephoros is also mentioned in the accounts of both Matthew of Edessa and Michael the Syrian, who wrote their chronicles several centuries after the events and are therefore quite objective in their treatment of Nikephoros, lacking political intrigue related to him. Michael is quite brief in his account of Nikephoros, but gives a balanced view – while he portrays Michael VII as incompetent and corrupt, he does praise Nikephoros as Attaleiates does. Michael's usefulness is limited by his brevity on the subject, although it is likely, based on the contents of his chronicle, that Attaleiates himself served as a source. Matthew's chronicle is longer, but clearly derived from the work of Psellos, as Matthew openly praises Michael VII while ridiculing Nikephoros, who he portrays as a hedonistic womanizer; ironically the exact accusation which Michael the Syrian makes against Michael VII.