the meaning of basileus

[alejandro]

Hi CompanionsI recently read an article:Hellenistic Kings, War, and the Economy
M. M. Austin
The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 36, No. 2. (1986), pp. 450-466.The author mentions that "basileus" and "king" are not interchangeable. She aduces that to be "basileus" you needed to have some military success, and that even if you were not entitled to the "crown", you could achieve it you were successful enough (the example provided is Demetrios, who became joint-basileus with Antigonos after defeating Ptolemy in Cyprus).
Do you know about this distinction? Is it really so? I have to admit is the first time I heard about it.
Kind regardsAlejandro

[marcus]

Hi Alejandro,No, that's the first time I've heard that, too.I wouldn't be surprised, but my Greek certainly isn't good enough, or extensive enough, to be able to shed any light on it.So what other word did they use for a 'king'?All the bestMarcus

[davej]

I thin there is a bit of contention on this one, from memory the Ancient Greek for king in actually Wanax which is spelt with a digamma. The Letter disappeared from use during the dark ages and therefore the word could not be used. From my understanding and i am prepared to be pumbbled by somebody like John the Digamma looked like a latin F on an angle. Basileus actually just means head man or boss. As kings were rare in Ancient Greece and Tyrants were fairly big Basileus fits well. I wonder how the Spartans refered to their Kings, it would be interesting if they retained the term Wanax or not, as there is little written record by he Spartans themselves I can only guess.

[ruthaki]

The Greek word for "king" is "basilios" and
"kingdom" is "basileio" As far as I know a "king" was a "king" in all sense of the word.

[Link]

Hi miguel,it is true, basileus is not interchangable with a king.basileus, or as it is written in the texts - kaibasileus - maybe kaiza sileus or kaiTSAR sileus, kai vas ileus. It means a "gatherer of/for/to strenght". The same as the military aspect of your combined forces/titles examples. The title goes to the strongests and he might not be a Coronaial.Caranus I, around (800 BC.) was the first Macedonian King. That is the name that has come down to us (in its various forms) as King, Czar, Shar, Sar, Tsaro, Ceasar, Dzarius, (Rhahdja?????) etc.Caranus reads to mean as "the organiser of the food".Cheers!

[davej]

kaibasileus if I am not very much mistaken would translate directly as and king. Now I think everybdy would agree thats silly. Furthermore Czar or Tsar etc all stem from a Latin term Caesar after non other then Julius Caesar. This term was a cognomon meaning hairy but later associated with the Emporers of Rome. The term became official as a replacement for the term for king Rex which was dispised by the Roman people. If I am reading your post correctly you are claiming credit for all of these terms for Macedon. Please! What next?

[beausefaless]

You could be correct this name is on a few of my coins but the reason for the introduction of the title has never been adequately explained. Newell in Tarsos only after he had already decided upon 324 as its date of introduction there, ventured the suggestion that it was due to Alexander's conquest of India and the finalization of his conquest of all the Great King's domains. The title was dropped ca. 318-315 at least at Amphipolis so the right of succession and the title before the kings name would be what you mentioned.

[alejandro]

Hi MarcusThe author uses King, but says that she does it simply because of "tradition". She refers then to a book that investigates the issue: Robert Drews, "Basileus: The evidence for Kingship in Geometric Greece", Yale Classical Monographs, number 4. New Haven, Yale University Press.
I couldn't find it online, only a review. According to the review, the thesis is that in the Dark Age polis had no king, but basileis.
Not very enlightening either, but that's all I got.
I was just wondering whether someone found this statement before, and could clarify it for me!
RegardsAlejandro

[yiannis]

The term "wannax" (later on Annax) was Mucenean and was not used afterwards. The Tyrants were not kings, but people that took over power either by the support of the military (like a modern dictator) or by the support of a part of the people (something like early Saddan Hussein!).
Kings were those that were able to pass over power to their offsprings, like the Spartan or Macedonian kings were doing.

[agesilaos]

Yiannis is right wanax was the Mycenaean term and as such is found on the Pylos tablets and other Linear B archives; during the Dark Ages in Greece Greek developed more fully and with it the nomenclature for leaders and basileos means king pure and simple.Confusion may be creeping in because the Diadochoi did not assume the title until after the battle of Salamis; there were two compelling reasons not the least being the existence of King Alexander IV, Kassander cleared that obstacle; the other being their want of Argaeid blood, hence their need for a propaganda coup following a military success; to take the title meant to aspire to unifying the Empire for the Antigonids ( and they were well placed to try Ptolemy defeated, Seleucus exiled and Kassander looking shaky) The others took the title to counter the effect of the Antigonid assumption thereof, afterall if two satraps call themselves King it is only natural that other dynasts follow suit lest they be taken to endorse their new status.

[davej]

Yiannis, I know what a Tyrant is or was. Some Tyrants were actually a reasonable solution to a poltical situation and were not always the evil image we percieve them to be Piesistratos for example did more to establish Athens than almost anybody else. And before that sparks debate, Cliesthenes, Solon, Themistokles and Perikles would have had nothing to work with had Piesistratos not established Athens as a cult and cultural centre. Secondly I also know that the Mycenaean empire preceeded the dark ages of greek and that Linaer A and B are not the same as Greek. Are you suggesting that Mycenaeans are not Greek?

[davej]

KArl,I don't like to take you on because you are usually right. Please find below the definition of Basileus as lifted from the Liddel and Scott. Please note that Homer used the word for judge or captain (as I suggested head man), further more Yiannis if you note Herodutud used the term to describe Pistratus and Gelo. I confess I am out of my league now so I can't argue any further. Suffice to say word evolve to mean things they were not intended. I don't knoe if Caesar or hairy was really what the Roman had in mind as a title for emporer and I am sure the Tsar of Russia did'nt just mean the hairy guy. See below. Oh and g'day mate where have ou been?ba^si^l-eus , ho, gen. e+¦s, Ep. +¬os, Cypr. +¬Wos Inscr.Cypr.104,135H.: acc. basilea, contr. -+¬ Orac. ap. Hdt.7.220, E.Fr.781.24 (lyr.): nom. pl. basileis, Aeol. -+¬es Sapph.Supp.6.4 , IG12(2).6 (Mytil.), -eies ib. 646a45, al., Ep. -+¬es, old Att. -+¬s S.Aj.188 ,960 (both lyr.), cf. Hdn. Gr.1.430: acc. pl. basileas IG12.115 , later basileis ib.2.243, etc.:-- king, chief, Hom., etc.: freq. with collat. sense of captain or judge, Hes. Op.202; diotrephees b. Il.2.445 , etc.; theioi Od.4.691 , etc.; later, hereditary king, opp. turannos, Arist.EN1160b3, etc.; but also of tyrants, as Hiero, Pi.O.1.23; of Gelo, Hdt.7.161; of Pisistratus, Eup.123, cf. Sch. Ar.Ach.61: joined with a Subst., basileus an+¬r Il.3.170 , etc.; an+¬r b. Hdt.1.90 ; anax b. lord king, A.Pers.5, cf. B.17.1: c. gen., b. ne+¦n A. Ag.114 (anap.); oi+¦n+¦n b., of the eagle, ibid., Pi.O.13.21: Comp. basileuterosmore kingly, Il.9.160 ,392, Od.15.533, Tyrt.12.7: Sup. basileutatos Il.9.

[yiannis]

Hi Dave,Absolutely agree with you on the Tyrants issue. But where did I say or imply that Linear b is not Greek? Of course it is and it has been deciphered many years ago. That, unlike Linear A (the Minoan script) which has not yet been deciphered yet and is obviously pre-Hellenic.Regards,
Yiannis

[marcus]

Hi Dave,It wasn't really an issue for the Romans that Caesar meant 'hairy', as they didn't use the name to mean 'emperor' as such.For a start, as we all know, Julius Caesar was not an emperor. Octavian took on the name Caesar when he was adopted as Julius' heir, and thereafter the 'emperor' was whoever was adopted as the heir to Caesar - who just happened to have the greatest wealth and greatest number of amici and consilii. I think it all changed with the death of Nero, because only at that time did the 'title' pass out of the family - but by that time the name was adopted to indicate the status that the 'emperor' had gained, that is, as the 'heir' to the position formerly held by the head of the Caesarian family.Our word 'emperor' comes from 'imperator', which just meant 'general' to the Romans; and Augustus, when he became ruler of the empire adopted the title 'princeps'.Was that too garbled? I know what I mean :-)All the bestMarcus

[marcus]

Actually, I thought that the language used in the Linear B tablets is *not* Greek - or, rather, it shows definite similarities with Ancient Greek but not so many that it can be identified as the same language.On the other hand, I was asleep in most of those lectures, 'cos they started at 8am and that's *far* too early for a student to be up and about...All the bestMarcus