Note 561 — Chapter XVII · GOVERNMENT IN THE HEROIC AGE.

In explanation of this phenomenon the view has been put forward (cf. Finsler, N. Jahrb. XIII 319 ff., 396 ff.; summarised 410 ff.) that the form of government depicted in the Odyssey is really an aristocracy, whereas the evidence of the Iliad is inconsistent owing to traditional reminiscences of a time of real kingship. Thus in the latter poem βασιλεύς (in the singular) is generally used only of Agamemnon, though there are exceptions, e.g. I 331, where it is applied to "Achilleus, dem der Titel, streng genommen, nicht zukommt, da Peleus noch lebt" (p. 404 f.). I do not think that this explanation is likely to carry conviction to anyone who has studied early Teutonic history. It is clear that in early times throughout the Teutonic area—in England down to the end of the seventh century and in the North much later—the title of king was applied to sons and other relatives of kings, as well as to dependent princes. The only qualifications for the title were (i) royal birth, (ii) the possession of some kind of authority or 'lordship' (τιμή). How small this authority might be can be seen from St Olaf's Saga (Heimskr.), cap. 4, where we are told that Olaf had the title of king given to him by his followers; "for it was customary that herkonungar (i.e. Viking chiefs) who were engaged in piracy should take the title of king at once, if they were of royal birth, although they governed no territories." The qualification of royal birth however was essential. The title was not taken even by so great a man as Earl Haakon of Lade, who had kings practically dependent on him. I see no reason for regarding the conditions depicted in either of the Homeric poems as different from what we find in the North, although, owing presumably to the smallness of the kingdoms, all the important characters appear to be persons of royal birth.