SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF ΠΡΟΣΚΥΝΗΣΙΣ AT THE LATE ANTIQUE IMPERIAL

COURT
Author(s): Stanislav Doležal
Source: Byzantion , 2009, Vol. 79 (2009), pp. 136-149
Published by: Peeters Publishers

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.com/stable/44173173

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.com/stable/44173173?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Peeters Publishers is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Byzantion

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF IIPOZKYNHIIZ

AT THE LATE ANTIQUE IMPERIAL COURT

Introduced as a formal way of expressing deference and subordina-

tion towards an Emperor, the so-called TīpooKuvrļaic; became a part of
elaborate ritual at the late antique imperial court. The intentions
Diocletian, who is sometimes believed to have introduced this practic
are clear enough : to elevate the role of the Emperor above his subjec
Averil Cameron summerized the opinion of some fourth-century writ
in this way : "...Diocletian is credited with transforming the Rom
empire into a kind of 'oriental despotism' by importing court cerem
nials and titles from Sassanian Persia." Cameron, however, righ
pointed out that some of Diocletian's predecessors had already eith
introduced such innovations at the court or recognized an existin
trend ('). Alexander Demandt, too, noted that several ancient auth
"haben Diocletian vorgeworfen, persische Rituale eingeführt und dam
das Ideal des Bürgerkaisers zugunsten eines Gottkaisers verraten
haben. Tatsächlich hat Diocletian lediglich Elemente ausgestaltet,
auch zuvor bei römischen Kaisern schon nachzuweisen sind (2)." There
exists a comprehensive literature on the subject of changing habits a
the Roman imperial court during the Late Antiquity, including the pr
lem of introducing the TipooKuvrjau; (3). Many questions, however, st

(l) Averil Cameron, The Later Roman Empire AD 284-430, London, 1993, p. 42. F
a somewhat different view, see K. L. Noethlichs, Strukturen und Funktionen
spätantiken Kaiserhofes, in A. Winterling (ed.), Comitatus. Beiträge zur Erforschu
des spätantiken Kaiserhofes, Berlin, 1998, p. 18.
(2) A. Demandt, Die Spätantike : römische Geschichte von Diocletian bis Justini
284-565 n. Chr. ( Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 3, 6), München, 1989, p. 22
(3) Of the most important, cf. O. Treitinger, Oströmische Kaiser- und Reichsid
nach ihrer Gestaltung im höfischen Zeremoniell vom oströmischen Staats-
Reichsgedanken, Darmstadt, 19562 ; A. Alföldi, Die monarchische Repräsentation
römischen Kaiserreiche, Darmstadt, 19703 ; J. Bleicken, Verfassungs- und Sozia
schichte des Römischen Kaiserreiches, I-II, Paderborn, 1978 ; F. Kolb, Diocletian un

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF IIPOIKYNHZIZ 137

need to be answered. For example, the exact nature of itpoaKÚvrioiç at

the Achaemenid court is still a matter of debate. Also, the way and time
of its introduction at various Hellenistic royal courts is unknown. As for
its development, Franz Altheim believed that this ritual in Hellenistic
kingdoms involved only a kiss, but not a prostration 0). On the other
hand, J. R. Hamilton was convinced that by Alexander's time, it must
have involved a prostration (5). And we do not even know whether in
Parthia the npoaKÚvrioiç remained a common part of the culture, as it
seems to have been the case in the Achaemenid Persia.
In this article I will merely confine myself to the interesting question
of the possibility of Eastern influence on the development of the rcpoo-
KuvrļGic; in the Roman environment. The question is simple : was this
custom imported from Parthia (or Sassanid Persia), or did it rather orig-
inate within the Empire ?
But first of all, a definition of the term TipoaKuvrļcnc; is needed. Ori-
ginally, as will be noted below, 7ipoaKÚvr10i<; may indeed refer to the
Persian custom of prostrating oneself before a person of higher social
rank. However, it is a Greek word. The verb npooKuveiv means "greet",
"welcome respectfully" or even "kiss". In relation with the gods or their
images, it also means "make obeisance", or more specifically, "fall down
and worship." The meaning "to kiss" is contained in the original verb
Kuveîv and this is why the verb npooKuveiv also means "to kiss a per-
son" (as a sign of respect) (6).
It seems that npooKuvrļoic; (in all aforementioned meanings) was
quite common in the Achaemenid Persia. According to Herodotus, a
Persian, when meeting another Persian of equal rank, would kiss him

die erste Tetrarchie : Improvisation oder Experiment in der Organisation monarchi-

scher Herrschaft ? ( Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte, 27), Berlin
- New York, 1987 ; W. Kuhoff, Diokletian und die Epoche der Tetrarchie. Das römische
Reich zwischen Krisenbewältigung und Neuaufbau ( 284-313 n. Chr.), Frankfurt am
Main, 2001 ; Idem, Aktuelle Perspektiven der Diokletianforschung, in : A. Demandt -
A. Goltz - H. Schlange-Schöningen (ed.), Diokletian und die Tetrarchie. Aspekte einer
Zeitenwende ( Millennium-Studien , l), Berlin, 2004, pp. 10-26.
(4) F. Altheim, Proskynesis, in Paideia, 5 (1950), p. 307.
(5) J. R. Hamilton, Alexander the Great, London, 1973, p. 105.
(6) See H. G. Liddell - R. Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, with a Revised Supple-
ment, Oxford, 1996, p. 1518, s.v. npooKuveiv. Cf. also the Etymologicum Gudianum,
ed. F. W. Sturz, Leipzig, 1818 (= Hildesheim, 1973), s.v. kuveîv: cpiXeîv, Kai kuveîv
ôioccpéper cpiÀeîv pèv rò àycmãv kuveîv 5è tò toū; xeíàeoiv àaná^Eiv.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
138 S. DOLEŽAL

on the lips, whereas from som

receive a kiss on the cheek, and
ing had to bow down before
Throughout this article, this so
ty, be named "TipooKuvrļūic; t
include prostrations made by t
there actually were such prost
vrļūu; made before kings were
and therefore are open to spec
The Persians - just as the Gr
divine beings such as the sun (
GKÚvr10iç type 2". However, th
in mentioning the type 1, whi
the same kind as type 2 of TtpoaK
the behaviour of the Persians w
derstandings between the tw
tempt of the Persians by the G
Perhaps most famously, Her
the Persian culture, often m
before their kings (l0). Similar
was described by another Gree
Marathon. A Persian, begging
TtpooKÚvr|aiç before an Atheni
because of his splendid appear
obeisance to this man, supposin
and the headband that he wore

(7) Herodotus 1, 134.

(8) Cf. Plutarchus,
Aristides 15, 7 =
Historiker 688 (ròv ßaaiAecoc; Sočík
(9) We can take for example king
ing to make obeisance to her only
ucpi aútrjç tf¡ "Hpą TtpoaKuvfļaai ļ
yevoç, 5wpá te rfj 0ew rooauia ne
29, 12 (eiť cię TT]v auArļv npoeÀB
cally : Xenophon, Cyropaedia 7, 5, 3
(IO) Herodotus 1, 119 ; 1, 134 ; 3,
paedia 5, 3, 18 ; 8, 3, 14 and else
description in Cyropaedia 7, 5, 32
kiss the king's hands and feet (vcc

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF IIPOIKYNHZIZ 139

fashion and showed him a great mass of gold buried up in a sort of

pit In making the obeisance there was very clearly a prostration
(npoaeneaev) involved, which is quite remarkable and supports the idea
of an actual prostration before Persian kings.
There can be no doubt, however, that any forms of humble personal
submission before a ruler had no tradition in the Greek world whatso-
ever. Therefore, irpooKÚvrioiç type 1 seemed totally inappropriate and
unacceptable to the Greeks, who reserved any forms of submission,
such as kneeling down or falling onto the ground, only for the relation-
ships with their gods (12), or perhaps heroes (13). The proud reply of the
Spartan envoys to the Xerxes is sufficiently illustrative : they said that
it was not their custom to bow down before a man.14 Xenophon in his
Anabasis confirms the dislike of TipoaKuvrļaic; by the Greeks ; he address-
es the Greek soldiers as follows : "You recognize no man to be your mas-
ter (Secntotiļv), venerating (npooKuveīre) only the gods (15)".
And yet Homer frequently mentions a Greek, often of a high social
rank, grasping the knees and kissing the hands of a person whom he
beseeches (16). It may also be relevant to mention here that the famous
miracle-worker Apollonius of Tyana, according to his biographer
Philostratus, let himself to be worshipped ("). Of course, Apollonius was
considered to have a personal shortcut to the gods and therefore could
be worshipped accordingly. Much the same can be said about Pytha-
goras and perhaps Empedocles (18).

(ll) Plutarchus, Aristides 5, 7 (roúto) yáp nç cbç è'oike tcõv ßapßapcov jtpoaé-
neoEV, oirjGeiç ßaaiAea 5ià riļv KOļjtļv Kai tò otpócpiov eivar TipooKuvtļoac; 5è Kai
XaßonEvoq irjç SeÇiãç, ěSei^e tîoÀù xpuaíov év Àcxkkqj rivi Karopcopuyiiévov).
(12) Hence the early Christian usage of the word npoaKuvďv "to worship
God" (see John 4, 21-24) ; in this precise meaning the word appears in the works
of the Greek church historians and other late antique writers.
(13) Lucianus, Verne historiae 1, 7 (the travellers bow to a monument of Hera-
cles).
(14) Herodotus 7, 136 (oure yáp 091 êv vópoj eivai äv0po)Ttov TtpoaKUvéeiv).
(15) Xenophon, Anabasis 3, 2, 13. See Plutarchus, Themistocles 27 and Alexander
54, for a similar argument.
(16) See Homerus, Ilias 24, 478, where Priamus begs Achilles for the body of
Hector.
(17) See Philostratus, Vita Apollonii 7, 21, where a Roman tribune reproaches
this behaviour of Apollonius, saying that "tò yap iipoaKuveīaGai ae únò rcLv
áv0pc!)Tiü)v 5iaßeßXr)Kev ljç ïacjv à^ioúnevov rolq Geou;" ; cf. also ibidem, 7, 22.
(18) Diogenes Laertius 8, 11 and 8, 68-69, respectively.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
140 S. DOLEŽAL

It may also be noteworthy t

living in Asia Minor around 40
their Persian masters. The Sp
completing his successful ca
emissaries from the free Gre
make npooKÚvri<nç at the Per
an audience. The Athenian com
a contumely, chose instead to
An interesting projection of
tious novel Aethiopica, written
Heliodorus, who made his p
reject making itpooKÚvrioiç in
ruling king. The Persian cour
queen chose not to reproach
courtiers : "Forgive him, fo
being a foreigner ; for he, bei
of despising us Persians (2l)".
We encounter here anothe
Persians regarded their kin
claimed that this was not the
kings as proof of their own
them (22). Wiesehöfer admits

(19) Xenophon, Agesilaus 1, 34 : to

KaÇonévouç ópcõv riļjcoļjevouc; úc
(20) According to Cornelius Nepo
by following words : "necesse est e
{quod. jīQ00xx)vt)01v Uli vocant). "n
per me nihilo setius editis mandat
inquit "non est grave quemvis hon
opprobrio, si, cum ex ea sim profect
barbarorum fung quam illius more
(21) Heliodorus, Aethiopica 7, 19
KecpaÀfjç "Xaîpe" ecprļ "ßaaiAeiov
Tcov Kai Gpoöv riva ori pfļ npoa
roAļjrļpoū Kai Gpaaécoc; àcpiévtco
àiteípco Kai Çévoj Kai oÀov "EAA
voaoūvn").
(22) See J. Wiesehöfer, "Denn ihr
scher, sondern nur den Göttem. Bem
M. Maggi - E. Provasi (ed.), Religiou

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF IIPOZKYNHZIZ 141

tained that the Persians indeed did take their kings for their gods (23),
some of the Greeks expressing a strong dislike of this custom (24).
Although we can agree that these authors claimed so either by mistake
or with a deliberate intention to deceive their readers or hearers, that
is not the point. The point is that many Greeks failed to differentiate
between the type 1 and 2 of the Persian npoGKUvrļou;. They were con-
vinced that the reverence of the Persians to their kings was not sub-
stantially different from the veneration of the gods in the Greek world.
The Persians revered their kings in a way that was - from the Greek
point of view - identical with, or at any rate not very far from, the god-
related npooKUvrļoic; type 2.

Having conquered the Persian Empire and seeking to adopt Persian

habits, Alexander the Great inevitably failed to change the behavioural
patterns of the Greeks and Macedonians and to enforce such practices.
Arrianus reports that Callisthenes of Olynthus, a professional historian
in Alexander's retinue, acted as a speaker of the disconcerted Mace-
donians, who obviously rejected any form of submission before their
king. Callisthenes consequently fell out of favour with the king and
was probably executed (25). Although these plans of Alexander were
thwarted, there were to come other, more successful attempts to
implant this type of TtpooKuvrļaic; in the West. As with the Greek culture,
we should examine the background of the Roman culture first.
In the Roman culture, there was an analogous (although not tanta-
mount) expression to the word npooKuveīv - the verb (se) proster-
nen (26). In its literal meaning "to cast (oneself) facedown" it was com-
monly used already by the Roman writers during the republican peri-

Asia. Studies in Honour of Ch. Gnoli on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday on 6th Decem-
ber 2002, Wiesbaden, 2003, pp. 447-452.
(23) Cf. Aeschylus, Persae 157 (0eoû pèv eůváreipcc nepowv, 0eoü 5è Kai ļitļirļp
ecpuç) and Pseudo-Aristoteles, De mundo 398a22 (wç av ó ßaaiAeüc; aùróq, õsarcó-
rrļ<; Kai Geòç òvonaÇópevoç, navra pèv ßAeitoi, itávra 5è âKoúoi).
(24) Isocrates, Panegyricus 151 (Gvrjròv pèv avSpa TipoaKuvoõvrec;) ; cf.
Demosthenes, Meidias 106 (îtpoaKUveïv roùc; ußpi^ovrac; co otte p êv rolę ßapßapou;).
(25) Arrianus, Anabasis 4, 11 ; cf. Curtius Rufus 8, 5, 6 {iussitque more Persarum
Macedonas venerabundos ipsum salutare prosternentes humi corpora).
(26) From prosternere (to spread), especially from its reflexive variant se
prostendere "to kneel down before someone or to lay prostrate on the ground",
see Oxford Latin Dictionary, Oxford, 1968, p. 1502, s.v. prosterno.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
142 S. DOLEŽAL

od (27)ê There was also an alter

the noun adoratio, which imp
a display of reverence or ev
Obviously, it often indicated
original meaning of the ver
address", shifting afterwar
quently also to "pay divine ho
sance to (29)". If the verb coul
eration of a person (as it could
bear much the same meaning a
Apuleius in his Metamorphos
In one of his digressions from
beautiful princess, whom co
way and indeed worshipped
Venus. They would stand befo
the mouth" and inflecting th
were wont to do when worsh

(27) In the literal meaning "to fa

Philippicae 2, 45 or Livius 45, 20,
see Cicero, Pro Planeio 50 or Velle
verb prostendere could be used f
work of Curtius Rufus (8, 5, 12)
other Macedonians at court to pa
to set an example : upon the kin
take place, he will cast himself f
semetipsum, cum rex inisset conv
Propertius 4, 8, 69 ( geniumque m
Augustae, Aeli Spartiani Severus 18,
(28) For example, Livius 21, 17, 4
(29) Oxford Latin Dictionary y p.
mological Dictionary of Latin, Ch
words ad and os (literally "to" an
the mouth".
(30) Noethlichs, Strukturen , p. 1
schaftsauffassung ab Diokletian is
Schon ab Diokletian wurde diese
(31) Apuleius, Metamorposes 4, 28
to in erectum pollicem residente ut
tur adorationibus).

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF nPOZKYNHIIZ 143

support indirectly this description (32). What is important, however, is

the striking resemblance to several Greek erotic novels, where the
theme is also echoed (").
According to Ammianus Marcellinus, Diocletian was the first of all
Emperors ( omnium primus ) who let himself to be venerated by the "bar-
barous ritual and in royal fashion ( extero ritu et regio more), whereas all
the previous Emperors were contented to be simply greeted, just like
the judges (34)". Actually, we do not know exactly when such practices
were introduced at the imperial court, but even if Diocletian actually
was the person who had formally established those customs, it still does
not mean that TtpoaKÚvrioiç was anything new to the Roman society (35).
In reality, it can be traced to much earlier times. During the Principáte
there are several cases of an adoration or prostration attested ; obvi-
ously, it seems logical that those Emperors who claimed godlike status
for themselves also required some kind of TipooKuvrļaic; or adoratio. For
example, Suetonius tells us that a Roman senator named Vitellius spon-
taneously started to do obeisance to Emperor Caligula ( adorare ut deum
instituit) (36). The way Vitellius did it is especially remarkable : capite
velato circumvertensque se, deinde procumbens. Interestingly, Vitellius
introduced this practice after his arrival from Syria (reversus ex Syria).
Could this remark of Suetonius, together with the described manner of
TtpoaKi3vrļai(;, possibly indicate an Parthian origin of the Roman npo-
OKUvrļau; ?
In the year 205, during the rule of Septimius Severus, there was an
attempt of Gaius Fulvius Plautianus, one of the two praefecti praetorio, to

(32) More or less metaphorically, Lucanus 6, 243 ( adorato summittat Caesare

signa) and 8, 594-595 ( sed ne summissis precibus Pompeius adoret/ sceptra sua dona-
ta manu) or Iuvenalis 10, 62.
(33) We can take for example Chariton, De Chaerea et Callirhoe 3, 2, 14 (ßa5i-
Çouoav 5è autrļv ornò toö tepévouc; èiti tř|v GáÀaooav iSóvreç oi vaõtai Seípati
KOCTEaxÉÔTiaocv, (i>ç Tfjç 'A(ppo5ítr1ç aùrrjc; Èpxopévriq iva epßfj, Kai ojp^rļaav
áGpóoi npooKuvfļaai) ; 3, 9, 1 (rjSrļ Y®P Ka' oè wç 0eàv oi ^evoi npoaKuvoùai) and
elsewhere, or Xenophon Ephesius, Ephesiaca 1, 1, 3 ; 1, 2, 7 and 1, 12, 1.
(34) Ammianus Marcellinus 15, 5, 18 (cum semper antea ad similitudinem iudicum
salutatos principes legerimus).
(35) Cf. Eunapius, Vitae sophistarum 6, 3, 11, speaking of an existing trend or
tradition in the time of Constantius II (ajoitep voļii^ouoiv 'Pcopaīoi ßaoiXea itpo-
axuvav).
(36) Suetonius, Vitellius 2, 5.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 144 S. DOLEŽAL

seize the imperial power for h

one military tribune to kill t
must have been a smart and
do what he was ordered and
Plautianus "just as if he was a
rļSrļ ßaaiAsa), only to reveal t
tribune was a Syrian (koù yàp
of any relevance when the ori
Frank Kolb raised the issue of
KuvTļoic; during the reign of
probably not the case ; a mere
be the only standard occasion
speaks of the funeral of Sept
not only to the new Emperor
with the ashes of the dece
ekúvouv) 0o). The Scriptores H
able a source, tells us about
rebelled in the reign of Probu
adoratus est ("'). This "adorat
seems to have been some kind
from the Scriptores Historiae
queen Zenobia was venerated
fashion (")"• Regardless of any
Augustae, is this not a clear e
queen of Palmyra demanded f
Kuvrļaic; that was common in
kings ?
Let us now look closely at this custom at the Parthian and Sassanid
royal courts, respectively, starting in the time of the first contacts

(37) Herodianus 3, 11, 8.

(38) It is embarrassing that Dio Cassius (76, 3) knows nothing about this plot
and tells us a quite different version of the Plautianus' downfall (with no
proskynesis involved).
(39) F. Kolb, Herrscherideologie in der Spätantike, Berlin, 2001, p. 40.
(40) Herodianus 4.1.3.
(41) Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Quadrigae tyrannorum 9, 3.
(42) Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Tyranni triginta 30, 13 : more magis Persico
adorata est.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF flPOZKYNHZIZ 145

between the Parthians and Romans. Already in 66 BCE, the king of

Armenia Tigranes the Great, having been defeated by the Romans, paid
homage to the victorious Pompey ("). Crassus, too, was given this proof
of subordination from barbarians ("). Much later, in 37 CE, the Parthian
king Artabanus II paid homage to images of Roman Emperors, thus
expressing his subordination to Rome C5)- This theme is echoed in
Philostratus' Vita ApoUonii, where the reverence towards the image of
the Parthian king Vardanes I (ruling ca 40-47) is described. According to
this fictional story, Apollonius was to make obeisance towards the
image of the king (xpuořjv eiKÓva tou ßaaiÄeux;) in order to enter the
city of Babylon (iļv ei ļjr) TtpooKuvīļoeie tiç, où Gejíitòv ř|v éocpoiTÕv
eoo*). Apollonius protested, arguing that such a demand was not
required at the court of the Roman Emperor (napà toö 'Pojjiaítov äpxov-
toç oúSejiía dvayKri toútou) (46).
Perhaps most notably, in 66 CE, Nero accepted a formal TipoaKÚviqoic;
from the Armenian prince Tiridates, who paid a visit to him in Rome to
be crowned the king of Armenia. Cassius Dio accurately describes both
of their meetings. The first one took place in Naples, on the prince's
journey to Rome. Tiridates fell onto his knees before the Emperor and,
with his arms crossed, called Nero his master. Then he made the itpo-
aKuvrļoi<; (Cassius is not very specific here) ("). Nero then took the
prince to Rome, where the coronation took place. It was, in fact, a very
ceremonial event, intended for general public, during which Tiridates
received his crown, in exchange for his public submission to the
Emperor. Cassius Dio supplies details of the ceremony. In the morning,
the Emperor left the Palace, wearing a triumphal mantle and flanked by
senators and guards. He entered the forum, ascended the rostra and
seated himself upon a chair. The prince with his following walked
through the ranks of the Roman soldiers, approached the Emperor and

(43) See Appianus, Mithridates 489 : ó 5è Tiypávqq iļAGe Kal ròv noļiiīrļiov cbç
KpEÍTTOva ßapßapiKcöc; npoaeKuvrļaev.
(44) Plutarchus, Crassus 31, 1.
(45) Suetonius, Caligula 14, 3 : venitque ad colloquium legati consularis et trans-
gressus Euphraten aquilas et signa Romana Caesarumque imagines adoravit.
(46) Philostratus, Vita Apollonii 1, 27.
(47) Dio Cassius 63, 2, 4 : kocítoi Kai éç YHV tò yóvu Ka0£Ì(; Kai Tàç xeîpaç ÈTiaÀ-
AáÇaç, 5eaK0trļv te aùtòv óvo1iáaaç Kai itpooKuviíoaç.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
146 S. DOLEŽAL

did obeisance to him, "just like

Tiridates addressed the Empe
sion : "Master, I am the desce
Vologaesus and Pacorus, and y
are my god, to worship you as
Josef Wiesehöfer asserts that
at those times and quotes Tacit
ours could have been offered t
death (50). However, npoaKUvrļ
not unprecedented and was soo
deference of the Romans bef
Principáte, as noted above. Or
we possess about Caligula, wh
his lifetime (51) ? And he was
sive worship. Well before Di
ready (52) and the title dominu
Aurelianus ("). Moreover, the t
or imperator, deemed by many
supplemented with the word d
preface to his eighth book of E
"domine" and in one of his epi
Lord and God (54)". Perhaps ev

(48) Dio Cassius 63, 4, 3 : Kai perà

te aroi'xcov óttàitwv EKaiépcoGev T
rcpoaatávTEÇ npoa£KÚvr|oav aÙTÓv
(49) Dio Cassius 63, 5, 2 : éycó, Séa
5È Kai naKÓpou tcov ßaaiAecov àSe
aè tòv Euòv 0EÓv, TipoaKuvríoiov a
(50) Tacitus, Annales 15.74 (nam d
agere inter homines de s ierit). See W
(51) Suetonius, Caligula 22, 2-4, se
(52) Herodianus 1, 14, 8. Herodi
information about how Emperor
cers - they called him ù SécmoTa,
(53) It is true that we know so
Aurelian. In a local mint in Serd
struck in 274, see P. H. Webb - H.
London, 1927 (= 1998), p. 299, no. 3
natus ("god and lord by birth").
(54) Martialis 5, 8, 1 ( edictum dom

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF ilPOZKYNHZIZ 147

contemporary coins, which were commonly called domini (because they

bore the Emperor's image) (55). Some of the Emperors of the third cen-
tury seem to have required of their subjects to address them formally
by the appellation dominus (56). Accordingly, the appearance of the
Emperors began to change. This is how one source described such an
appearance in the person of Emperor Aurelian : "He put on his head,
being the first Roman to do so, a diadem and also put on clothes,
adorned by gold and precious stones. These manners were almost
unknown to the Romans until his time (")". Yet other sources already
describe such eccentricity in the behaviour of Gallienus and Elagabalus,
respectively (58).
But before arriving at any conclusions, let us briefly examine the sit-
uation at the court in the Sassanid Empire. There can be no doubt that
TipoaKuvrļcru; was at least at the courts of the Great Kings a common
habit, required from both subjects and client kings as a sign of submis-
sion (59). It even applied to the Christian bishops : Symeon, the bishop of
Seleucia and Ctesiphon once refused to make obeisance (ītpoaKuvrļou;)
before the king Sapor II., though he used to do so formerly (nporepov
touto TTOicòv). When the angry king asked him why he did not make
TtpooKuvrļaic; this time, although he had not objected to it previously,
the bishop replied : "Formerly I was not forced to renounce my belief in
God, and therefore I did not then object to pay the customary respect to
royalty (ļirļSev Siacpepójievoç tà vevoļiioļasva rcepi trļv ßaaiAsiav ¿TTĀrļ-
pouv) ; but now it would be improper for me to do so ; for I am here to
defend godliness and our creed (60)". After this, the king ordered him to
bow to the sun at least (toiocûtoc ebióvTct TrccpeKeÀeúôaro ó ßaoiAeuc;

(55) Martialis 4, 28, 5 (centum dominos novae monetae). He probably refers to

gold aurei.
(56) According to Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Aurelianus 14, 2, it was Em-
peror Valerianus.
(57) Epitome de caesaribus 35, 5.
(58) Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Gallienus 16, 4 ; Herodianus 5, 5, 3 : He
(Elagabal) wore the most splendorous robes (oxiÍHaaí te éa0fjro<; noXureXeorá-
toiç xpw|J£voq), made of purple fabric and gold... He used to wear a wreath,
resembling a tiara, but decorated with gold and precious stones" (èq eiôoç õè
nápaç arecpavrļv éniKeípevoc; xpuacõ Kai ÀíGoiç noiKiArļv riļiioic;).
(59) For example, the king of the Lazi Gubazes, see Procopius, De bellis 8, 16,
27.
(60) Sozomenus, Historia Ecclesiastica 2, 9, 3-5.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
148 S. DOLEŽAL

TtpoaKuvřjaai tòv rļ'Aiov), whic

story, the solar cult plays a not
when the king Perozes was cap
of the 5th century (61), he was fo
ruler of Hephthalites as a sym
with the Magi, Perozes decided,
prostrating himself before him
quite acceptable even for the G
It is clear, therefore, that in
least in relation to the rulers a
both the Parthian and Sassanid
that TtpoaKÚvrioiç could have
from Parthia more probably th
Oriental worlds were always
tranfers of ideas and concepts.
siderably in the Roman world
tactics and weaponry in the R
transfer of ceremonial habits s
Persia to the Roman Empire se
had its parallel in the Hunnic
that 7īpooKi3vrļcn<; was in use
"auch die Hunnen hatten dem
iranischen Umgebung entlehnt
prepared to adopt such habits r

University of SouthStanislav
Bohemia, Dol
Faculty of dolezal@ff.j
Philosophy,
Czech Republic.

(61) According to R. N. Frye, The P

The Cambridge History of Iran, III,
as R. Göbl, Dokumente zur Geschicht
II, Wiesbaden, 1967, p. 148, gives t
(62) Procopius, De bellis 1, 3, 17-22
(63) Another example of prosk
Isdigerdes I. bowing to the everlas
Historia Ecclesiastica 7, 8 : oi népa
oiKtp rivi 5irļveK(I)q vccnópevov itö
(64) F. Altheim, Geschichte der Hun

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOME REMARKS ON THE ORIGIN OF IIPOZKYNHZIZ 149

Summary

The institution of the TipOGKi3vrļci(; at the Roman imperial court seems to

have its roots in the world of Iranian peoples, be it the Parthian Empire or
Sassanid Persia. Many hints in our sources point eastwards when we consider
the origin of this custom. The contacts between the Graeco-Roman and Persian
world had a long tradition by the time of Diocletian. For several reasons, it is
hard to imagine that the TrpocKuvrļaic;, as an act of obeisance before the late
antique Emperors, evolved purely within the Empire and unaffected by Eastern
influences.

This content downloaded from

92.55.100.198 on Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:05:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms