#basileis

In the Odyssey, there are occasions where individuals seem to be described as rulers of populations: Odysseus’ comrades ask Antiphates’ daughter who the basileus of the Laestrygones is (10.110), while Pheidon is named as the basileusof the Thesprotians (14.316; 19.287) and Phaidimos the basileus of the Sidonians (15.118); in the Iliad, Rhesos is named as king of the Thracians (10.435). What is interesting is that all these cases concern populations that were considered either non-Hellenic (the Laestrygones, Sidonians, and Thracians) or something less than Hellenic (the Thesprotians) – a usage that, in some senses, anticipates the application of the term to non-Greek sovereigns in the Classical period. On the Greek side, we do hear of basileis of the Argives (e.g. Il. 10.195) and of the Achaeans (24.404), but both these names are used virtually synonymously to designate the collective forces that marched on Troy rather than specific populations rooted in particular regions. Among the Achaeans, only Agamemnon is explicitly named as king of anything, and in this case it is not of a population but of a place – “Mycenae, rich in gold” (Il. 7.180; 11.46). Other heroes, such as Achilles (1.331) or Diomedes and Odysseus (14.379–80), are simply nominated basileis without any further specification. Similarly, in the Catalogue of Ships, the Achaean heroes may sometimes be described as arkhoi(“leaders”) of the contingents that they bring to Troy (e.g. Il. 2.541, 2.685), but never as basileis. Agamemnon does merit the title anax (e.g. Il. 1.172), which might have suggested a more regal status were it not for the fact that the term is also applied to Aeneas (5.311) and Polydamas (15.453–4), neither of whom was a sovereign ruler.

In fact, there are three reasons why it is difficult to view Homeric basileis as kings in any sense we would understand today. Firstly, basileus appears to be a relative, rather than an absolute, term. In the Iliad (9.69), Nestor describes Agamemnon as basileutatos (“the most basileus”) while Agamemnon himself notes that he is basileuteros (“more of a basileus”) than Achilles (9.160). Some have inferred from this that Achilles belongs to a more junior cadre of princes, subordinated to a paramount ruler, Agamemnon, but a little later, Achilles refuses Agamemnon’s offer of his daughter’s hand in marriage and bids him to “choose another of the Achaeans who is more similar to himself and more of a basileus” (9.391–92). This would seem to imply that basileus designates a personal authority that is subject to various gradations rather than a formally constituted office. Secondly, we often hear of a plurality of basileis. One of Penelope’s suitors, Antinous, points out that there are “many other basileis of the Achaeans in sea-girt Ithaca, both young and old” (Od. 1.394–95) and Alcinous notes that the Phaeacians have “twelve distinguished basileis who bear sway as leaders in the region, and I myself am the thirteenth” (8.390–91). Thirdly, the principle of hereditary succession, which would seem to be a fundamental characteristic of kingship as we understand it, is by no means guaranteed in the Homeric world. Odysseus is recognized as a basileus on Ithaca, but his father, Laertes, is still alive. Nor is there any certitude that his son, Telemachus, will succeed him to royal office should news of his demise be confirmed. When, in the Odyssey, Telemachus summons the assembly, we are told that the elders make way for him as he sits in the seat of his father (2.14) but he is utterly powerless at persuading – let alone ordering – his mother’s suitors to abstain from consuming the entire wealth of his house. Nor can it be accidental that the suitors Antinous and Eurymakhos are both described as basileis (18.64–65; 24.179).”

Social & material conditions changed greatly between the Mycenaean Age, with its high population and tightly-regulated regimes, and the Early Dark Age.  The outlying settlements were no longer bound to the palaces and to each another, whether politically or economically.

The population had declined, so there was plenty of land.  The small farming communities had more than enough agricultural land in the fertile plains, and the less-fertile farmland could be used as a reserve.  Upland plains & mountain valleys were either left alone, or used for grazing. Natural resources such as timber, game, birds and wild foods were abundant.

Authority in these communities operated face-to-face and was simple.  Dark Age Greece probably reverted back to an authority of local chiefs, similar to the system that existed before the Late Bronze Age & the consolidation of power by a single chief.

Graves & building remains from the 1000's & 900's don't show much in the way of social differences – the chiefs and their families seem to have lived not much differently from the others.

The Basileus

The title pasireu appears on the Linear B tablets during the Mycenaean Age, referring to a minor official, a representative of the wanax who functioned as the mayor of a village or town.  This role survived into the Dark Age, but the word changed to basileus (plural basileis).  However, the basileus was no longer the representative of the wanax, but the political & military leader himself of a settlement & the land around it.

In Homer's writings, the title wanax still appears, but only as an honorific equivalent of basileus, and also as the title of Zeus, who is called “(w)anax of gods and men”.  Although there was no wanax anymore, the name was remembered, and so was the exalted status of the man who held it.

The Greek word basileus is usually translated as “king”, but this is not accurate – it really should be translated as “chief”.

The town of Lefkandi, on the island of Euboea, flourished during the Mycenaean Age, but declined during the destruction period.  Then it revived in the Submycenaean period, and was exceptionally prosperous by Dark Age standards until 700, when it was abandoned.

In 1981, excavators discovered the largest Dark Age building known at that time, built around 1000 BC, and measuring 9.1 x 44.5m.  Beneath the main room was a bronze amphora containing a man's cremated remains, and beside it were an iron sword, spearhead, and whetstone.  A woman's skeleton (probably his wife) was next to the amphora, with gold ornaments.  The skeletons of four horses were buried nearby.

Not long after the funeral, the building was demolished and covered with a huge mound of earth & stone.  This man was clearly the basileus of Lefkandi and the surrounding area, and was given a warrior's burial. The actual function of the original building is not known – it may have been his house, or a large tomb.

Nichoria was an important subsidiary town in the kingdom of Pylos, and located in the south-western Peloponnese.  It was abandoned after the attacks, in about 1200, and revived around 1050 as several separate hamlets along the ridge-top.  It was in a poorer, less progressive region than Euboea (which kept steady contact with the Near East), but it reached a population of 200 early in the 800's [i.e. not long after 900], and was “fairly prosperous in a humble way”.  Nichoria supported itself with farming & herding (especially cattle).

The densest population area was the centre of the ridge, which was where a large building from the 900's was found, measuring about 10.7m long and 7m wide.  It had one large room and a small porch, and was identified as the village chieftain's house.

It was the same shape, and made of the same materials, as the other houses on the ridge, but was larger and built better.  The floor was packed earth, the walls mud-brick, and a steep thatched roof extended over the shallow front porch.  It was extended in the early 800's [i.e. not long after 900], with another smaller room being added in the back, and a large courtyard in front of the porch.  The house was now 15.8m long.

It was abandoned in the late 800's [i.e. before 800], but a new 2-room house was built right next too it.  This new house was even better constructed, and the courtyard was longer.  However, Nichoria's population was declining around this time, and the whole site was abandoned around 750 BC.  This may have been because of Spartan aggression in Messenia.

The houses of the basileis show that they were important people.  The construction & renovation of their houses required the time & labour of a good number of workers, unlike the ordinary people's homes, which could be built by their occupants.

The basileis' houses may have had some communal functions – there is evidence that the Nichoria basileus' house served as the settlement's religious centre, and perhaps as a communal storehouse as well.  But even though the basileis had the highest status in their communities, they lived in a way that was very similar to those they ruled.