Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Basileus
View on Wikipedia
Coin of Antiochus I Soter. The reverse shows Apollo seated on an omphalos. Inscription reads ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ (lit. 'of king Antiochus'). | |
| Romanization | basileus |
|---|---|
| Pronunciation | Ancient Greek: [basile͜ús], Modern Greek: [vasiˈlefs] |
| Language | Greek |
| Origin | |
| Meaning | King, Emperor, Monarch |
| Region of origin | Ancient Greece |
Basileus (Ancient Greek: βασιλεύς)[a] is a Greek term and title that has signified various types of monarchs throughout history. In the English-speaking world, it is perhaps most widely understood to mean 'monarch', referring to either a 'king' or an 'emperor'. The title was used by sovereigns and other persons of authority in ancient Greece (especially during the Hellenistic period), the Byzantine emperors, and the kings of modern Greece. The name Basileios (Basil), deriving from the term basileus, is a common given name in the Eastern Orthodox Church and Syriac Orthodox Church for the Maphrian.[1]
The feminine forms are basileia (βασίλεια),[2] basilissa (βασίλισσα), basillis (βασιλίς), or the archaic basilinna (βασιλίννα), meaning 'queen' or 'empress'.[3] The related term basileia (βασιλεία) has meanings such as 'sovereignty', 'royalty', 'kingdom', 'reign', 'dominion' and 'authority'.[4][5]
Etymology
[edit]The etymology of basileus is uncertain. The Mycenaean form was *gʷasileus (Linear B: 𐀣𐀯𐀩𐀄, qa-si-re-u), denoting some sort of court official or local chieftain, but not an actual king. Its hypothetical earlier Proto-Greek form would be *gʷatileus.[6] Some linguists assume that it is a non-Greek word that was adopted by Bronze Age Greeks from a pre-existing linguistic Pre-Greek substrate of the Eastern Mediterranean.[7] Schindler[8] argues for an inner-Greek innovation of the -eus inflection type from Indo-European material rather than a Mediterranean loan.[8]
Ancient Greece
[edit]Original senses encountered on clay tablets
[edit]The first written instance of this word is found on the baked clay tablets discovered in excavations of Mycenaean palaces originally destroyed by fire. The tablets are dated from the 15th century BCE to the 11th century BCE and are inscribed with the Linear B script, which was deciphered by Michael Ventris in 1952 and corresponds to a very early form of Greek. The word basileus is written as qa-si-re-u and its original meaning was "chieftain" (in one particular tablet the chieftain of the guild of bronzesmiths is referred to as qa-si-re-u). Here the initial letter q- represents the PIE labiovelar consonant */gʷ/, transformed in later Greek into /b/. Linear B uses the same glyph for /l/ and /r/, now transcribed with a Latin "r" by uniform convention. (Similarly, the Old Persian word vazir also has almost the same meaning as "chieftain".) Linear B only represents syllables of single vowel, or of a consonant-vowel form, therefore any final -s is omitted.
Basileus vs. wanax in Mycenaean times
[edit]
The word can be contrasted with wanax, another word used more specifically for "king" and usually meaning "High King" or "overlord". With the collapse of Mycenaean society, the position of wanax ceases to be mentioned, and the basileis (the plural form) appear the topmost potentates in Greek society. In the works of Homer wanax appears, in the form ánax, mostly in descriptions of Zeus and of very few human monarchs, most notably Agamemnon. Otherwise the term survived almost exclusively as a component in compound personal names (e.g., Anaxagóras, Pleistoánax) and is still in use in Modern Greek in the description of the anáktoron / anáktora ("[place or home] of the ánax"), i.e. of the royal palace. The latter is essentially the same word as 𐀷𐀩𐀏𐀳𐀫 wa-na-ka-te-ro, wanákteros, "of the wanax / king" or "belonging to the wanax / king", used in Linear B tablets to refer to various craftsmen serving the king (e.g. the "palace", or royal, spinner, or the ivory worker), and to items belonging or offered to the king (javelin shafts, wheat, spices, precincts etc.).
Most of the Greek leaders in Homer's works are described as basileís, which is rendered conventionally in English as "kings". However, a more accurate translation may be "princes" or "chieftains", which would better represent conditions in Greek society in Homer's time, and also the roles ascribed to Homer's characters. Agamemnon tries to give orders to Achilles among many others, while another basileus serves as his charioteer. His will, however, is not to be obeyed automatically. In Homer the wanax is expected to rule over the other basileis by consensus rather than by coercion, which is why Achilles rebels (the main theme of the Iliad) when he decides that Agamemnon is treating him disrespectfully.
Archaic basileus
[edit]A study by R. Drews[10] demonstrates that even at the apex of Geometric and Archaic Greek society, basileus did not automatically translate to "king": In a number of places authority was exercised by a college of basileis drawn from a particular clan or group, and the office had term limits. However, basileus could also be applied to the hereditary leaders of "tribal" states, like those of the Arcadians and the Messenians, in which cases the term approximated the meaning of "king".[10]
Pseudo-Archytas' definition
[edit]According to pseudo-Archytas's treatise "On justice and law"[11] Basileus is more adequately translated into "Sovereign" than into "king". The reason for this is that it designates more the person of king than the office of king: the power of magistrates (arkhontes, "archons") derives from their social functions or offices, whereas the sovereign derives his power from himself. Sovereigns have auctoritas, whereas magistrates retain imperium. Pseudo-Archytas aimed at creating a theory of sovereignty completely enfranchised from laws, being itself the only source of legitimacy. He goes so far as qualifying the Basileus as nomos empsykhos, or "living law", which is the origin, according to Agamben, of the Führerprinzip and of Carl Schmitt's theories on dictatorship.
Classical times
[edit]
In classical times, most Greek states had abolished the hereditary royal office in favor of democratic or oligarchic rule. Some exceptions existed, namely the two hereditary Kings of Sparta (who served as joint commanders of the army, and were also called arkhagetai), the Kings of Cyrene, the Kings of Macedon and of the Molossians in Epirus and Kings of Arcadian Orchomenus. The Greeks also used the term to refer to various kings of "barbaric" (i.e. non-Greek) tribes in Thrace and Illyria, as well as to the Achaemenid kings of Persia. The Persian king was also referred to as Megas Basileus/Basileus Megas (Great King) or Basileus Basileōn, a translation of the Persian title xšāyaθiya xšāyaθiyānām ("King of Kings"), or simply "the king". There was also a cult of Zeus Basileus at Lebadeia. Aristotle distinguished the basileus, constrained by law, from the unlimited tyrant (tyrannos), who had generally seized control.
At Athens, the archon basileus was one of the nine archons, magistrates selected by lot. Of these, the archon eponymos (for whom the year was named), the polemarch (polemos archon = war lord) and the basileus divided the powers of Athens' ancient kings, with the basileus overseeing religious rites and homicide cases. His wife had to ritually marry Dionysus at the Anthesteria festival. Philippides of Paiania was one of the richest Athenians during the age of Lycurgus of Athens, he was honoured archon basileus in 293–292 BCE. Similar vestigial offices termed basileus existed in other Greek city-states. [citation needed] Thus in the Ionian League each member city had a basileus that represented it to the League sanctuary of the Panionion, whereas in the Roman period it was a League office of unclear duties, and was even held by women.[12]

By contrast, the authoritarian rulers were never termed basileus in classical Greece, but archon (ruler) or tyrannos (tyrant); although Pheidon of Argos is described by Aristotle as a basileus who made himself into a tyrannos.
Many Greek authors, reconciling Carthaginian supremacy in the western Mediterranean with eastern stereotypes of absolutist non-Hellenic government, termed the Punic chief magistrate, the sufet, as basileus in their native language. In fact, this office conformed to largely republican frameworks, being approximately equivalent in mandate to the Roman consul.[14] This conflation appears notably in Aristotle's otherwise positive description of the Carthaginian Constitution in the Politics, as well as in the writings of Polybius, Diodorus Siculus, and Diogenes Laertius. Roman and early Christian writings sourced from Greek fostered further mischaracterizations, with the sufet mislabeled as the Latin rex.[15]
Alexander the Great
[edit]
Basileus and Megas Basileus/Basileus Megas were exclusively used by Alexander the Great and his Hellenistic successors in Ptolemaic Egypt,[16] Asia (e.g. the Seleucid Empire, the Attalid kingdom and Pontus) and Macedon. The feminine counterpart is basilissa (queen), meaning both a queen regnant (such as Cleopatra) and a queen consort. It is at this time that the term basileus acquired a fully royal connotation, in stark contrast with the much less sophisticated earlier perceptions of kingship within Greece.[citation needed]
Romans and Byzantines
[edit]
Under Roman rule, the term basileus came to be used, in the Hellenistic tradition, to designate the Roman Emperor in the ordinary and literary speech of the Greek-speaking Eastern Mediterranean.[17](pp 263–264) Although the early Roman Emperors were careful to retain the façade of the republican institutions and to not formally adopt monarchical titles, the use of basileus amply illustrates that contemporaries clearly perceived that the Roman Empire was a monarchy in all but name.[18](pp 66–67) Nevertheless, despite its widespread use, due to its "royal" associations the title basileus remained unofficial for the Emperor, and was restricted in official documents to client kings in the East. Instead, in official context the imperial titles Caesar Augustus, translated or transliterated into Greek as Kaisar Sebastos or Kaisar Augoustos, and Imperator, translated as Autokratōr, were used.
By the 4th century however, basileus was applied in official usage exclusively to the two rulers considered equals to the Roman Emperor: the Sassanid Persian shahanshah ("king of kings"), and to a lesser degree the King of Axum, whose importance was rather peripheral in the Byzantine worldview.[18](pp 35, 42) Consequently, the title acquired the connotation of "emperor", and when barbarian kingdoms emerged on the ruins of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, their rulers were referred to in Greek not as basileus but as rēx or rēgas, the hellenized forms of the Latin title rex, king.[17](pp 263–264)
The first documented use of basileus Rhomaíōn in official context comes from the Persians: in a letter sent to Emperor Maurice (r. 582–602) by Chosroes II, Maurice is addressed in Greek as basileus Rhomaíōn instead of the habitual Middle Persian appellation kēsar-i Hrōm ("Caesar of the Romans"), while the Persian ruler refers to himself correspondingly as Persōn basileus, thereby dropping his own claim to the Greek equivalent of his formal title, basileus basileōn ("king of kings").[18](p 70) The title appears to have slowly crept into imperial titulature after that, and Emperor Heraclius is attested as using it alongside the long-established Autokratōr Kaisar in a letter to Kavadh II in 628. Finally, in a law promulgated on 21 March 629, the Latin titles were omitted altogether, and the simple formula πιστὸς ἐν Χριστῷ βασιλεύς, "faithful in Christ Emperor" was used instead.[18](p 31) The adoption of the new imperial formula has been traditionally interpreted by scholars such as Ernst Stein and George Ostrogorsky as indicative of the almost complete Hellenization of the Empire by that time.[18](p 32) In imperial coinage, however, Latin forms continued to be used. Only in the reign of Leo III the Isaurian (r. 717–741) did the title basileus appear in silver coins, and on gold coinage only under Constantine VI (r. 780–797).[17](pp 263–264) "BASILEUS" was initially stamped on Byzantine coins in Latin script, and only gradually were some Latin characters replaced with Greek ones, resulting in mixed forms such as "BASIΛEVS".

Until the 9th century, the Byzantines reserved the term basileus among Christian rulers exclusively for their own emperor in Constantinople. This usage was initially accepted by the "barbarian" kings of Western Europe themselves: Despite having neglected the fiction of Roman suzerainty from the 6th century onward, they refrained from adopting imperial titles.[18](pp 52–57)
The situation began to change when the Western European states began to challenge the Empire's political supremacy and its right to the universal imperial title. The catalytic event was the coronation of Charlemagne as imperator Romanorum ("Emperor of the Romans") by Pope Leo III on 25 December 800, at St. Peter's in Rome. The matter was complicated by the fact that the Eastern Empire was then managed by Irene (r. 797–802), who had gained control after the death of her husband, the Emperor Leo IV (r. 775–780), as regent for their nine-year-old son, Constantine VI (r. 780–797). After Constantine's coming of age, Irene eventually decided to rule in her own name. In the conflict that ensued, Irene was victorious, and Constantine was blinded and imprisoned, to die soon afterward. The revulsion generated by this incident of filicide cum regicide was compounded by the traditional (and especially Frankish) aversion to the idea of a female sovereign. Although it is often claimed that, as monarch, Irene called herself in the male form basileus, in fact she normally used the title basilissa.[19][b]
The Pope would seize this opportunity to cite the imperial throne being held by a woman as vacant and establish his position as able to divinely appoint rulers. Leading up to this, Charlemagne and his Frankish predecessors had increasingly become the Papacy's source of protection while the Byzantine's position in Italy had weakened significantly. In 800 CE, Charlemagne, now a king of multiple territories, was proclaimed "Emperor of the Romans" by the Pope.[17](p 413) Charlemagne's claim to the imperial title of the Romans began a prolonged diplomatic controversy which was resolved only in 812 when the Byzantines agreed to recognize him as "basileus", while continuing to refuse any connection with the Roman Empire. In an effort to emphasize their own Roman legitimacy, the Byzantine rulers thereafter began to use the fuller form basileus Rhomaíōn (βασιλεύς Ῥωμαίων, "emperor of the Romans") instead of the simple "basileus", a practice that continued in official usage until the end of the Empire.[17](pp 263–264, 413)
During the 12th century, Byzantine emperors of the Angelos dynasty, in their correspondence with the Pope and foreign rulers, styled themselves as "in Christ the God faithful, Emperor, crowned by God, Anax, powerful, exalted, Augustus and Autocrat of the Romans" (Medieval Greek: ἐν Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ πιστὸς βασιλεύς, θεοστεφής, ἄναξ, κραταιός, ὑψηλός, αὔγουστος καὶ αὐτοκράτωρ Ῥωμαίων, romanized: en Khristō to Theō pistos basileus, theostephēs, anax, krataios, hupsēlos, augoustos, kaì autokratōr Rhōmaiōn). Variations of this title are found in letters of the Angelid emperors to Pope Innocentius III; these are nearly direct translations of the Greek title into Latin, such as: in Christo Deo fidelis imperator divinitus coronatus sublimis potens excelsus semper augustus moderator Romanorum.[20] In his correspondence with the Holy Roman Emperor, Isaakios II added to his title the Latin phrase haeres coronae Constantini magni ('heir to the crown of Constantine the great'), in order to distinguish and prioritize the 'New' Rome of the east over the 'Old' Rome of the west.[21]
By the Palaiologan period, the full style of the Emperor was finalized in the phrase, "in Christ the God faithful, Emperor and Autocrat of the Romans" (Medieval Greek: ἐν Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ πιστὸς βασιλεὺς καὶ αὐτοκράτωρ Ῥωμαίων, romanized: en Christō tō Theō pistós basileus kai autokratōr Rhōmaíōn), as exemplified in documents such as Constantine XI's chrysobull to the city of Ragusa issued in 1451, two years before the Ottoman conquest of the Byzantine Empire in the Siege of Constantinople.[22]
The later German emperors were also conceded the title "basileus of the Franks". The Byzantine title in turn produced further diplomatic incidents in the 10th century, when Western potentates addressed the emperors as "emperors of the Greeks".[17](pp 263–264) A similar diplomatic controversy (this time accompanied by war) ensued from the imperial aspirations of Simeon I of Bulgaria in the early 10th century. Aspiring to conquer Constantinople, Simeon claimed the title "basileus of the Bulgarians and of the Romans", but was only recognized as "basileus of the Bulgarians" by the Byzantines. From the 12th century however, the title was increasingly, although again not officially, used for powerful foreign sovereigns, such as the kings of France or Sicily, the tsars of the restored Bulgarian Empire, the Latin emperors and the emperors of Trebizond. In time, the title was also applied to major non-Christian rulers, such as Tamerlane or Mehmed II.[17](pp 263–264) Finally, in 1354, Stefan Dušan, king of Serbia, assumed the imperial title, based on his Bulgarian mother's Theodora Smilets of Bulgaria royal line, self-styling himself in Greek as basileus and autokratōr of the Romans and Serbs which was, however, not recognized by the Byzantines.[17](pp 1, 950–1, 951)
New Testament
[edit]While the terms used for the Roman emperor are Kaisar Augustos (Decree from Caesar Augustus, Dogma para Kaisaros Augoustou, Luke 2:1) or just Kaisar (see Render unto Caesar...), and Pontius Pilate is termed Hegemon (Matthew 27:2), Herod is referred to as basileus (in his coins also Basileōs Herodou, "of King Herod", and by Josephus).
Regarding Jesus, the term basileus acquired a new Christian theological meaning out of the further concept of basileus as a chief religious officer during the Hellenistic period. Jesus is titled both Basileus Basileōn (Βασιλεὺς βασιλέων = King of Kings, Revelation 17:14, 19:16, a previous Near Eastern phrase for rulers of empires, and Basileus tōn basileuontōn (Βασιλεὺς τῶν βασιλευόντων = literally King of those being kings, 1 Timothy 6:15) in the New Testament. Other titles involving basileus include Basileus tōn Ouranōn, translated as King of Heaven, and Basileus tōn Ioudaiōn, i.e. King of the Jews (see INRI). In Byzantine art, standard depictions of Jesus included Basileus tēs Doxēs (King of Glory),[23] a phrase derived from Psalms 24:10, and Kyrios tēs Doxēs (Lord of Glory), from 1 Corinthians 2:8.
Modern Greece
[edit]During the post-Byzantine period, the term basileus, owing to the renewed influence of classical writers on the language, reverted to its earlier meaning of "king". This transformation had already begun in informal usage in the works of some classicizing Byzantine authors. In the Convention of London in 1832, the Great Powers[c] agreed that the new Greek state should become a monarchy, and chose the Wittelsbach Prince Otto of Bavaria as its first king.

The Great Powers furthermore ordained that his title was to be "Βασιλεὺς τῆς Ἑλλάδος" Vasilefs tes Elládos, meaning "King of Greece", instead of "Βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἑλλήνων" Vasilefs ton Ellénon, i.e. "King of the Greeks". This title had two implications: first, that Otto was the king only of the small Kingdom of Greece, and not of all Greeks, whose majority still remained ruled by the Ottoman Empire. Second, that the kingship did not depend on the will of the Greek people, a fact further underlined by Otto's addition of the formula "ἐλέῳ Θεοῦ" eléo Theou, i.e. "By the Grace (Mercy) of God". For 10 years, until the 3 September 1843 Revolution, Otto ruled as an absolute monarch, and his autocratic rule, which continued even after he was forced to grant a constitution, made him very unpopular. After being ousted in 1862, the new Danish dynasty of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg began with King George I. Both to assert national independence from the will of the Great Powers,[c] and to emphasize the constitutional responsibilities of the monarch towards the people, his title was modified to "King of the Hellenes", which remained the official royal title, until the abolition of the Greek monarchy in 1924 and 1973.
The two Greek kings who had the name of Constantine, a name of great sentimental and symbolic significance, especially in the irredentist context of the Megali Idea, were often, although never officially, numbered in direct succession to the last Byzantine Emperor, Constantine XI, as Constantine XII[24] and Constantine XIII.[25]
See also
[edit]- Anthesteria – a festival of Dionysus, in which a basilinna (wife of the archon basileus during the event) went through a ceremony of marriage to the wine god. Comparable to carnivals and other charivaris.
- Auctoritas
- Imperium
- Sovereignty
- Basilica
Footnotes
[edit]- ^ Ancient Greek: [basile͜ús], Modern Greek: [vasiˈlefs] ⓘ; plural βασιλεῖς, basileis Ancient Greek: [basilêːs], Modern Greek: [vasiˈlis].
- ^ There are only three instances where it is known that Irene of Athens used the title "basileus": Two legal documents in which she signed herself as "Emperor of the Romans" and a gold coin of hers found in Sicily bearing the title of "basileus". In the case of the coin's inscription, its lettering is of poor quality and the attribution to Irene may, therefore, be problematic. In reality, she used the title "basilissa" in all other documents, coins and seals.[19]
- ^ a b The "Great Powers" were the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, July Monarchy of France, and Imperial Russia.
References
[edit]- ^ "www.synaxaristis - ΜΕΓΑΣ ΣΥΝΑΞΑΡΙΣΤΗΣ". www.synaxarion.gr. Retrieved 2024-06-27.
- ^ Faculty of Classics, University of Cambridge; Diggle, James (2021-04-22). The Cambridge Greek Lexicon (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 275. doi:10.1017/9781139050043. ISBN 978-1-139-05004-3.
Od. A. Hdt. E. Pl. AR. Plu (sc. Odyssey; Aeschylus; Herodotus; Euripides; Plato; Apollonius Rhodius; Plutarch)
- ^ Brown, Roland W. (1977) [1st Pub. 1954]. Composition of Scientific Words : A manual of methods and a lexicon of materials for the practice of logotechnics. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institutional Press. p. 374. ISBN 978-0-87474-286-2. OCLC 4495758. Retrieved 27 August 2025 – via Internet Archive.
- ^ Faculty of Classics, University of Cambridge; Diggle, James (2021-04-22). The Cambridge Greek Lexicon (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 274. doi:10.1017/9781139050043. ISBN 978-1-139-05004-3.
- ^ "βασιλεία". billmounce.com. Retrieved 2024-07-20.
- ^ New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. 2008. p. 330.
- ^ Beekes, R.S.P. (2009). Etymological Dictionary of Greek. Brill. p. 203.
- ^ a b Schindler, J. (1976). "On the Greek type hippeús". In Meid (ed.). Studies Palmer. pp. 349−352.
- ^ "IG IV 220 – PHI Greek Inscriptions". epigraphy.packhum.org. Retrieved 2023-12-13.
- ^ a b Drews, R. (1983). Basileus: The evidence for kingship in geometric Greece. New Haven, CT: Yale.
- ^ as quoted by Agamben, G. (2005). State of Exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 70. ISBN 978-0-226-00925-4.
- ^ Hallmannsecker, Martin (2022). Roman Ionia: Constructions of Cultural Identity in Western Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 73–74, 77–78. ISBN 978-1-009-15018-7.
- ^ "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Indo-Greeks: Agathocleia (Agathokleia)". coinindia.com. Retrieved 2024-06-27.
- ^ Roppa, Andrea (7 May 2018). "Connectivity, trade, and Punic persistence: Insularity and identity in late Punic to Roman Republican Sardinia (3rd–1st century BC)". In Kouremenos, Anna (ed.). Insularity and Identity in the Roman Mediterranean (1st ed.). Oxbow Books. pp. 144–164. ISBN 978-178570580-9.
- ^ Bell, Brenda (1989). "Roman literary attitudes to foreign terms and the Carthaginian 'sufetes'". Classical Association of South Africa. 32: 29–36. JSTOR 24591869.
- ^ Anagnostou-Laoutides, Eva; Pfeiffer, Stefan (2022-01-19). Culture and Ideology under the Seleukids: Unframing a Dynasty. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG. p. 316. ISBN 978-3-11-075562-6.
- ^ a b c d e f g h
Kazhdan, Alexander, ed. (1991). Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-504652-6. - ^ a b c d e f
Chrysos, Evangelos K. (1978). "The title ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ in early Byzantine international relations". Dumbarton Oaks Papers. 32. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks: 29–75. doi:10.2307/1291418. JSTOR 1291418. - ^ a b James, Liz (2009). "Men, women, eunuchs: Gender, sex, and power". In Haldon, J. (ed.). A Social History of Byzantium. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 45–46. ISBN 978-1-4051-3241-1.
- ^ Van Tricht, Filip (2011). The Latin Renovatio of Byzantium: The Empire of Constantinople (1204-1228). Leiden, The Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV. p. 64. ISBN 978-90-04-20323-5. Retrieved 5 September 2024.
- ^ Kolia-Dermitzaki (2014). "Byzantium and the West – the West and Byzantium (ninth-twelfth centuries): focusing on Zweikaiserproblem. An outline of ideas and practices". In Pitsakis, Konstantinos G. (ed.). Aureus. Volume dedicated to Professor Evangelos K. Chrysos. Athens, Greece: National Hellenic Research Foundation. pp. 374–5.
- ^ Virgilio, Carlo (2013). Florence, Byzantium and the Ottomans (1439-1481). Politics and Economics (PDF) (Doctor of Philosophy thesis). University of Birmingham. pp. 85, 359. Retrieved 2024-08-23.
- ^ Galavaris, George (1981). The Icon in the Life of the Church: Doctrine, liturgy, devotion. BRILL. p. 38. ISBN 90-04-06402-8.
- ^ Brozan, Nadine (13 April 1994). "Chronicle". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 21, 2012. Retrieved 2022-08-13.
- ^ Barret, Matt (ed.). "King Constantine II and Queen Anne-Marie". A History of Greece.
- Janda, Michael (2004). "Annäherung an basileús". In Krisch, Thomas; Lindner, Thomas; Müller, Ulrich (eds.). Analecta Homini Universali Dicata – Festschrift für Oswald Panagl zum 65 Geburtstag [Analects Describing the Universal Man – commemorative publication for Oswald Panagl on his 65th birthday]. Vol. 1. Stuttgart, DE: Hans Dieter Heinz. pp. 84−94.
External links
[edit]- "The Linear B tablets and Mycenaean social, political, and economic organization". Bronze Age: Lesson 25. Dartmouth College. Archived from the original on 2004-09-10.
Basileus
View on GrokipediaEtymology
Linguistic Roots and Early Attestations
The term basileus (Ancient Greek: βασιλεύς) first appears in written form as gwasileus in the Linear B syllabic script of Mycenaean Greek, representing the earliest attested evidence of the Greek language from approximately 1500 to 1200 BCE.[5] Its linguistic roots remain uncertain, with prominent etymologists such as Robert Beekes classifying it as a Pre-Greek substrate word, originating from non-Indo-European elements introduced by local populations in the Aegean prior to or during the arrival of Greek speakers, rather than from Proto-Indo-European formations.[5] Alternative proposals linking it to Indo-European compounds, such as a combination of terms for "spear" or "servant" with "people" or "ruler," lack consensus and are not supported by the phonological evolution from gwasileus to classical basileus. The earliest attestations occur in administrative clay tablets from Mycenaean palatial sites, including Knossos on Crete (ca. 1400–1350 BCE), Pylos in Messenia (ca. 1300–1200 BCE), and Thebes in Boeotia, where gwasileus (transcribed as qa-si-re-u) denotes local officials or chieftains managing community-level economic transactions, land allocations, and religious offerings under the oversight of the higher-ranking wanax (paramount ruler).[5] These texts, primarily economic records rather than narrative inscriptions, reveal gwasileus as a functional title for subordinate "big men" with authority in provincial or village contexts, distinct from the centralized power of the wanax.[5] Over 20 instances appear across the corpus, often in plural form indicating multiple such figures per region, underscoring a decentralized hierarchy in Mycenaean society.[5] Following the collapse of Mycenaean palaces around 1200 BCE, the term reemerges in oral traditions preserved in Homeric epics (composed ca. 8th century BCE but reflecting earlier usages), where basileus retains connotations of local leadership among noble contingents, appearing 74 times, often in plural to describe regional rulers like those on Ithaca.[5] This continuity from Linear B evidence suggests semantic stability in denoting honor-based, community-oriented authority, though without the palatial administrative specificity of earlier texts.[5]Semantic Shifts in Pre-Classical Greek
In Mycenaean Greek texts from the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1400–1200 BCE), the term basileus appears in Linear B as qasireu, denoting a subordinate administrative or military official rather than the supreme ruler, who was designated wanax.[5] This usage reflects a hierarchical structure where qasireu managed local or specialized duties under the centralized wanax authority, as evidenced in palace records from sites like Pylos and Knossos.[6] Etymologically linked to Indo-European roots suggesting agency or leadership (*gʷas-), basileus lacked the divine or priestly connotations associated with wanax, which may derive from non-Indo-European origins tied to regeneration and sacral kingship.[7] Following the collapse of Mycenaean palatial systems around 1200 BCE, the semantic field of rulership underwent significant reconfiguration during the Early Iron Age (ca. 1100–800 BCE). The wanax title receded from human application, surviving primarily in epic tradition and divine epithets, while basileus emerged as the predominant term for secular leaders in emerging polities.[8] This shift corresponded to decentralized power structures, where basileis (often plural) functioned as hereditary chieftains or aristocrats overseeing clans or villages, as inferred from archaeological evidence of small-scale settlements and burial practices indicating elite lineages without palatial centralization.[9] By the Archaic period (ca. 800–480 BCE), particularly in Homeric epics composed around the 8th century BCE, basileus denoted local rulers or nobles exercising authority through kinship ties and wealth distribution, rather than absolute monarchy.[6] In the Iliad and Odyssey, basileus is applied to figures like Agamemnon in a consultative, non-despotic sense, emphasizing themistes (customary justice) over coercive rule, marking a transition from Mycenaean bureaucratic hierarchy to oligarchic or timocratic governance.[10] This evolution underscores causal adaptations to post-palatial fragmentation, where basileus absorbed the semantic load of leadership amid the absence of wanax-style overlords, setting precedents for classical Greek conceptions of rule as embedded in community consensus.[11]Pre-Classical and Classical Greek Contexts
Mycenaean and Archaic Distinctions
In the Mycenaean period (c. 1600–1100 BCE), Linear B tablets distinguish gʷasileus (qa-si-re-u), the precursor to basileus, as a local chieftain or official subordinate to the wanax (wa-na-ka), the paramount ruler of a palatial center. The wanax exercised centralized authority over land distribution (e.g., temenos allotments), economic oversight, and religious rituals, as evidenced in Pylos tablets like PY Er 312 and PY Ta 711, where the wanax appears alongside the lawagetas (war leader) in hierarchical contexts. In contrast, gʷasileus figures handled localized administrative tasks, such as those in the Pylos Jn series related to economic transactions, indicating a role as "big men" or regional agents rather than sovereigns. This structure reflects a tiered power system, with gʷasileus operating below the palatial elite.[9][5] Following the Bronze Age collapse around 1200 BCE, the Archaic period (c. 800–480 BCE) saw semantic shifts preserved in Homeric epics, where basileus denoted multiple local chieftains or aristocrats within a single community, as in Ithaca's plural basilees (Odyssey 1.388–404), emphasizing decentralized authority without absolute monarchy. Anax, derived from wanax, retained elevated connotations for supreme leaders like Agamemnon ("anax andrōn Agamemnon," Iliad 9.163) or deities such as Zeus, often linked to divine or birth-related sovereignty. This evolution marks basileus as a term for mortal, regional rulers in a post-palatial landscape of competing elites, contrasting the Mycenaean pyramid where wanax dominated. Scholarly analysis identifies a persistent triad of roles—wanax for overarching sovereignty, basileus for local governance—adapted to Iron Age fragmentation.[5][9]Classical Basileus as Local Ruler
In Classical Greece (circa 500–323 BC), the term basileus denoted a local ruler or chieftain whose authority was typically limited to a specific polis, tribe, or functional domain, reflecting the fragmented political landscape of independent city-states rather than expansive empires. This contrasted with Near Eastern models of absolutism; Greek basileis derived power from tradition, consensus among elites, or election, often checked by councils (boulē), assemblies (ekklēsia), or magistrates. The term's application underscored a decentralized system where leadership emphasized communal welfare, military prowess, and ritual duties over personal sovereignty, as evidenced by its use in historiography to describe rulers of small realms without implying universal dominion. In Athens, the archōn basileus exemplified this localized role as one of the nine annual archons, a position formalized after Solon's reforms (circa 594 BC) and further democratized by lot selection post-487 BC from eligible aristocratic candidates. Primarily a religious functionary, he oversaw key festivals such as the City Dionysia and Anthesteria, managed the Eleusinian Mysteries in coordination with priestly families, and adjudicated homicide cases—distinguishing intentional killings (tried before the Areopagus) from involuntary ones (at courts like the Delphinion)—along with matters of sacrilege and family cult disputes. This office retained symbolic ties to mythic kings like Theseus but held no military or fiscal authority, serving instead as a ritual guardian amid the boule's and assembly's dominance, with ex-archons joining the Areopagus for lifelong oversight.[12][13] Beyond Athens, basileus applied to hereditary leaders in oligarchic or mixed constitutions, such as the dual Spartan basileis from the Agiad and Eurypontid houses, who commanded expeditions (e.g., against Persia in 480 BC) and consulted oracles but required ephoral vetoes and gerousia approval for policy, limiting them to ceremonial and wartime roles within Laconia's perimeter. In northern Greece, Thessalian basileis like those of the Aleuadae clan governed clans or districts circa 480–400 BC, allying with Persia or Athens while navigating federal amphictyonies, their influence rooted in cavalry leadership rather than centralized taxation or bureaucracy. Such figures operated as primus inter pares among nobles, their tenure vulnerable to exile or assassination, as seen in the turbulent politics of 4th-century Epirus under rulers like Neoptolemus. This local scope distinguished basileus from later Hellenistic megaloi basileis, highlighting Classical Greece's preference for balanced governance over monarchical consolidation.[1]Hellenistic and Imperial Transformations
Alexander the Great and Diadochi
Alexander III of Macedon, known as Alexander the Great, inherited the title basileus from his Argead predecessors as ruler of Macedon, a term denoting kingship in the Macedonian monarchy.[14] During his campaigns from 336 to 323 BC, Greek sources and inscriptions referred to him as basileus, alongside titles like Hegemon of the Hellenic League and, after Persian conquests, adaptations such as Pharaoh in Egypt, though he increasingly adopted Persian court protocols without formally altering his primary Greek title.[14] Following Alexander's death in Babylon on June 10 or 11, 323 BC, his Diadochi—principal generals and successors including Antigonus, Ptolemy, Seleucus, Cassander, and Lysimachus—initially refrained from claiming the royal title basileus to avoid usurping what was reserved for Alexander's unborn heir or legitimate Argead claimants, maintaining a regency under figures like Perdiccas and Antipater.[15] This changed decisively in 306 BC when Antigonus I Monophthalmus and his son Demetrius I Poliorcetes, after their naval victory over Ptolemy I's fleet at Salamis in Cyprus (September 306 BC), proclaimed themselves basileis, asserting independent kingship over Asia Minor and associated territories as a claim to Alexander's imperial legacy.[16][17] The proclamation, justified by their military success and control of key regions, prompted a cascade: Ptolemy I adopted basileus in Egypt shortly thereafter, followed by Seleucus I in Babylonia, Cassander in Macedon and Greece, and Lysimachus in Thrace by 305–304 BC, effectively partitioning Alexander's empire into rival Hellenistic kingdoms.[15] The Diadochi's adoption of basileus transformed the term from its classical connotation of a tribal or local chieftain into a marker of absolutist monarchy, blending Macedonian tradition with Achaemenid Persian influences such as divine kingship and vast territorial sovereignty, while rejecting classical Greek city-state norms of limited rule.[15] Coins, inscriptions, and decrees from this era, including those of Demetrius featuring royal iconography, reinforced basileus as a symbol of legitimacy and equality among the successors, each claiming descent from Alexander's divine favor without a supreme overlord.[16] This shift laid the foundation for the Hellenistic royal dynasties, where basileus endured as the standard title for rulers like the Ptolemies and Seleucids until Roman conquests.[15]Transition to Monarchical Absolutism
The adoption of the title basileus by the Diadochi in 306 BC represented a pivotal shift toward absolute monarchy in the Hellenistic world. Antigonus I Monophthalmus, following his son Demetrius Poliorcetes' decisive naval victory over Ptolemy I Soter's fleet at Salamis in Cyprus, proclaimed himself and Demetrius as basileis, claiming royal diadems and symbols of sovereignty.[16] This event, occurring amid ongoing Wars of the Successors, broke the nominal fidelity to Alexander the Great's underage heirs and asserted Antigonus' control over Asia Minor, Syria, and Phoenicia as a personal domain rather than imperial satrapy.[15] The proclamation triggered a cascade among rivals, with Ptolemy I adopting the title in Egypt shortly thereafter, followed by Cassander in Macedonia, Lysimachus in Thrace, and Seleucus I in Babylonia by early 305 BC.[18] Each successor leveraged military achievements and Macedonian troop acclamation to legitimize their claims, dissolving the Argead pretense of unity and establishing independent dynasties.[15] This synchronized elevation ended satrapal collegiality, as basileus now denoted hereditary rulers unbound by specific territorial ties, enabling expansionist policies and negotiations on equal footing. Under Hellenistic basileis, the title evolved from its classical connotations of limited, council-shared authority—evident in Archaic or Homeric contexts—to signify absolutist dominion, incorporating Persian diadem iconography, divine honors via ruler cults, and centralized fiscal-military apparatuses.[15] Dynasts like the Antigonids and Ptolemies enforced loyalty through Greek settler colonies, royal epithets (e.g., Soter for Ptolemy I), and suppression of dissent, blending Macedonian traditions with oriental autocracy to sustain vast, tribute-dependent realms until Roman interventions diminished their power.[16] This absolutism prioritized conquest-derived legitimacy over constitutional restraint, reshaping Greek political norms across the oikoumene.Roman and Byzantine Imperial Usage
Early Roman Avoidance and Adoption
The Roman Republic's foundational aversion to monarchy, stemming from the overthrow of the last king Tarquinius Superbus around 509 BCE, carried into the imperial era, where rulers eschewed explicit regal titles to preserve the republican facade.[19] Early emperors like Augustus (r. 27 BCE–14 CE) rejected overt kingship designations, such as "rex" in Latin—directly translating to the Greek basileus—opting instead for princeps (first citizen), imperator (commander), and Augustus (revered one), which evoked military and civic authority without monarchical connotations.[19] In Greek-speaking eastern provinces, basileus appeared informally in local usage and literature to describe the emperor, akin to how Hellenistic rulers had employed it, but official imperial documents and coinage avoided it, favoring equivalents like autokratōr (for imperator) and sebastos (for Augustus) to align with Latin titulature.[4] This avoidance persisted through the Principate and Dominate, even as the empire Hellenized; for instance, Diocletian (r. 284–305 CE) and Constantine I (r. 306–337 CE) maintained Latin-derived titles in formal contexts, reflecting a deliberate rejection of basileus as too evocative of Eastern despotism or pre-republican Roman kingship.[4] The term's unofficial Eastern application underscored cultural bilingualism but did not infiltrate core imperial ideology until pressures from Persian wars and Arab invasions necessitated symbolic reconfiguration.[4] Adoption occurred under Heraclius (r. 610–641 CE), who, following his 622–628 campaigns culminating in the decisive victory over Khosrow II at Nineveh in 627 CE, reformed titulature in 629 CE by introducing pistos en Christō basileus ("faithful in Christ, emperor/king"), marking the first official imperial use of basileus and shifting away from Latin forms toward exclusively Greek ones.[4][19] This change, enacted amid territorial recovery and Christian emphasis, elevated basileus from informal Eastern descriptor to central title, symbolizing universal sovereignty under divine mandate while retaining traditional elements like Romaion (of the Romans).[4] Subsequent rulers, such as Constans II (r. 641–668 CE), integrated it fully, though it coexisted with autokratōr until basileus dominated Byzantine usage.[4]Byzantine Basileus as Divine Emperor
In the Byzantine Empire, the basileus embodied the fusion of Roman imperial authority with Christian sacral kingship, positioning the emperor as God's designated viceroy on earth tasked with preserving orthodoxy, justice, and the oikoumene.[20] This ideology, maturing from the 7th century onward, drew from biblical models of Davidic kingship, Hellenistic monarchical reverence, and Roman traditions of divine favor, portraying the basileus as the earthly counterpart to the heavenly sovereign—one God in heaven, one basileus on earth.[21] [20] The title basileus ton Rhomaion (emperor of the Romans) was formalized under Heraclius (r. 610–641), marking a shift to Greek linguistic dominance and underscoring the emperor's unique Christian legitimacy among rulers.[22] Emperors were depicted as isapostoloi (equal to the apostles), with authority extending to convoking ecumenical councils, as seen in the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, where Empress Irene acted on behalf of her son Constantine VI to restore icon veneration.[20] This theocratic role derived not from inherent divinity but from divine election, evidenced by coronation rituals where, from the mid-7th century, the Patriarch of Constantinople anointed the emperor with myrrh in Hagia Sophia before the emperor self-crowned, symbolizing personal divine mandate.[22] Sacred iconography reinforced this divine aura: emperors appeared on coins, mosaics, and manuscripts with nimbuses akin to saints, as in the 11th-century mosaic of Basil II (r. 976–1025) flanking Christ Pantocrator, equating imperial rule with cosmic order.[22] Court ceremonies demanded proskynesis (prostration), echoing biblical reverence for kings, while the emperor's birth in the Purple Chamber—emphasized from Constantine V (r. 741–775)—signified predestined legitimacy.[22] Yet, this ideology coexisted with practical checks; emperors could be deposed, as Michael III was by Basil I in 867, revealing that divine sanction was ideological rather than absolute, subject to elite and ecclesiastical consensus.[21] Modern historiography critiques overemphasis on unchecked sacral absolutism, attributing it to selective readings of panegyrics while primary sources like chronicles show contested successions.[21]Religious and Scriptural Dimensions
New Testament Applications
The Greek noun βασιλεύς (basileus), meaning "king," appears 115 times in the New Testament, typically referring to earthly monarchs but also applied to divine figures, particularly in messianic contexts.[23] This usage reflects the Koine Greek of the first century AD, where the term denoted rulers with regal authority, often contrasted with the spiritual kingship proclaimed in Jesus' teachings.[24] In historical narratives, basileus describes Jewish and foreign kings under Roman oversight, such as Herod the Great in Matthew 2:1 ("Herod the king") and Acts 12:1 (Herod Agrippa I), or Aretas IV in 2 Corinthians 11:32, emphasizing their temporal power amid Roman imperial dominance.[25] The term also alludes to the Roman emperor, as in 1 Peter 2:13 and 2:17, where Christians are urged to submit to the basileus (translated as "king" or "emperor"), likely referring to Nero or his predecessors, highlighting tensions between civic obedience and eschatological loyalty.[26] Pilate's inscription on the cross, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews" (Iēsous ho Nazōraios ho basileus tōn Ioudaiōn), in John 19:19, uses basileus mockingly yet prophetically, echoing messianic expectations from Jewish scriptures.[27] Theologically, basileus elevates Jesus as supreme sovereign, as in John 1:49 (Nathanael's confession: "you are the King of Israel") and the apocalyptic titles "King of kings and Lord of lords" (basileus basileōn kai kyrios kyriōn) in 1 Timothy 6:15, Revelation 17:14, and 19:16, portraying him as victor over earthly empires.[23] God the Father is implicitly the ultimate basileus through phrases like "the King eternal" in 1 Timothy 1:17, though direct application is rarer, underscoring a shift from Hellenistic royal ideology to transcendent divine rule. This dual usage—mundane versus eternal—fuels New Testament critiques of idolatry, as in John 19:15, where crowds reject Jesus for Caesar: "We have no king but the emperor."[25] Such applications prefigure later Christian imperial theology while affirming basileus as a bridge between political reality and promised theocracy.[28]Patristic and Theological Interpretations
In patristic literature, basileus retained its classical connotation of sovereign rule while acquiring deepened Christological significance, often portraying Christ as the archetypal basileus whose kingship transcended earthly monarchies. Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260–339 AD), in works such as the Life of Constantine, applied the term to the emperor as a "shepherd-basileus," explicitly modeling imperial authority on Christ's divine pastoral and regal functions, where the earthly ruler served as an image of the heavenly sovereign established by God.[29] This framework positioned Christian basileis as subordinates to Christ, executing visible victories against earthly adversaries in imitation of his invisible triumph over spiritual foes.[30] John Chrysostom (c. 347–407 AD) elaborated on basileus in homilies by evoking the heavenly basileus—identified with God or Christ—through Old Testament typologies, early imperial exemplars, and critiques of contemporary rulers, emphasizing attributes of unerring justice, mercy, and paternal care absent in human governance.[31] Similarly, Cappadocian Fathers like Basil the Great (c. 330–379 AD) invoked basileus in theological discourses on divine hierarchy, aligning it with Christ's role as the supreme basileus in the economy of salvation, where human rulers were to emulate Christomimetic virtues of righteousness and restraint.[32] Theologically, patristic exegesis interpreted basileus—especially in phrases like basileus basileōn ("King of kings") from Revelation 19:16—as denoting Christ's absolute, eschatological dominion over all principalities, a motif echoed in commentaries distinguishing his eternal, spiritual realm from transient political orders.[33] This usage reinforced causal distinctions between divine causality in creation and redemption versus human authority's derivative, contingent nature, cautioning against deifying emperors while affirming the basileus archetype as a locus for contemplating theosis and imperial ethics under Christ's unassailable sovereignty.Post-Byzantine and Modern Revivals
Medieval European Perceptions
In medieval Western Europe, the Byzantine emperor's title of basileus—formally basileus tōn Rhōmaiōn (emperor of the Romans)—was often rendered in Latin as rex, deliberately equating it to a mere kingship rather than imperial status equivalent to the Western imperator Romanorum. This translation served to undermine Byzantine claims to sole Roman legitimacy, particularly after Charlemagne's imperial coronation by Pope Leo III on December 25, 800, which Byzantium viewed as a usurpation but which Western sources portrayed as a restoration of true Roman authority over "effeminate Greeks."[19][34] The pejorative phrase rex Graecorum (king of the Greeks) became a standard Western designation for the basileus, emphasizing ethnic Greek identity over Roman universality and implying subordination to the Frankish or Holy Roman emperor.[35] This usage appeared in diplomatic exchanges and chronicles, such as those surrounding Otto I's negotiations in the mid-10th century, where Western envoys like Liutprand of Cremona described the Constantinopolitan court with disdain, highlighting perceived decadence and oriental despotism.[36] Such perceptions were reinforced by cultural and religious divergences, including Byzantine iconoclasm (726–843) and resistance to Filioque adoption, fostering views of the basileus as a ruler of schismatics rather than a co-equal Christian sovereign. Tensions over the title escalated in 10th-century diplomacy, when Western potentates addressed Byzantine rulers as "emperors of the Greeks" instead of acknowledging full imperial parity, prompting protests from Constantinople that equated such slights to heresy against Roman tradition.[19] Following the Great Schism of 1054, Western perceptions hardened further, with papal bulls and crusader rhetoric depicting the basileus as a usurper of ecclesiastical authority, culminating in the Fourth Crusade's sack of Constantinople in 1204, after which Latin emperors supplanted the Greek basileus in the city until 1261.[37] These views persisted in medieval texts, prioritizing causal political rivalry and doctrinal disputes over any shared imperial heritage.Modern Greek Monarchy
The Kingdom of Greece was proclaimed on 25 January 1832, following the Greek War of Independence and the London Protocol of 1830, which selected Prince Otto of Bavaria as its first monarch from the House of Wittelsbach.[38] Otto's Greek title was Βασιλεύς της Ελλάδος (Basileus tis Ellados), directly translating to "King of Greece," reflecting territorial sovereignty as defined by the protecting powers (Britain, France, and Russia).[39] He ruled as an absolute monarch until the 3 September 1843 Revolution forced adoption of the 1844 constitution, establishing a constitutional framework.[38] Otto was deposed in 1862 amid political unrest, leading to the Great Powers' selection of Prince William of Denmark as George I in 1863 from the House of Glücksburg.[40] The title was revised to Βασιλεύς των Ελλήνων (Basileus ton Ellinon), or "King of the Hellenes," emphasizing ethnic Greek rule and aligning with irredentist aspirations for the Megali Idea (Great Idea) of reclaiming Byzantine-era territories.[40] This form, incorporating the ancient Greek term basileus for sovereign, persisted for all subsequent kings, denoting constitutional head of state under the 1864 constitution until revisions in later periods.[40] The Glücksburg dynasty produced six kings amid turbulent intervals of republicanism and exile:| Monarch | Reign Periods | House | Key Events |
|---|---|---|---|
| George I | 1863–1913 | Glücksburg | Assassinated in Thessaloniki on 18 March 1913 during Balkan Wars expansion.[40] |
| Constantine I | 1913–1917; 1920–1922 | Glücksburg | Abdicated twice amid World War I National Schism and Asia Minor defeat.[40] |
| George II | 1922–1923; 1935–1947 | Glücksburg | Exiled in 1923; restored by 1935 plebiscite; died in exile during civil war aftermath.[40] |
| Paul | 1947–1964 | Glücksburg | Oversaw post-WWII reconstruction and Black Monday economic crisis.[40] |
| Constantine II | 1964–1973 | Glücksburg | Last reigning king; opposed 1967 military junta, leading to exile.[41] |
