Beate Dignas & Engelbert Winter - Kaveh Farrokh

34 Legitimate rule and the ‘family of kings’ 239
preserved. ‘Chosroes believes that both Empires are of divine right, designed
by eternal providence for protection of civilization and foreseen in its plan as
the lights in the firmament.’ 27 At the end of his letter, Xusrō calls himself the
son of the emperor28 and thereby tries to evoke the concept of the ‘family of
kings’ as well as to take advantage of the good personal relationship between
the rulers of both empires. Although a ‘fictive’ father-son relationship may
suggest a difference in status, the possibility of this diplomatic gesture
implies an equal rank between the two rulers. It is remarkable that Maurice
does not fail to pick up on Xusrō’s preferred ‘scenario’ and in a subsequent
letter also addresses the king as his son. 29
After he had sent the letter to Maurice, Xusrō also dispatched ambassadors
with specific proposals for the negotiations. Again the ambassadors
appealed to the emperor’s disposition towards solidarity with the king as
the legitimate Persian ruler. They acknowledged that through the design of
the rebel Bahrām Čōbīn the great Persian Empire was close to its downfall
but argued that the Romans would display a lack of sense if they wished this
to happen. 30 They continued their speech with the following explanation:
Theophylact Simocatta iv.13.7–21
(7) For one power alone is not able to shoulder the immense burden of taking
care of the organisation of the universe and one man’s pulse is not able to steer
everything created under the sun. (8) For unlike the oneness of the divine and first
rule it is not ever within us to take the earth, which is in a state opposed to that
of the order above, steered here and there towards the unstable by human beings
who by nature are in a state of flux, and whose views are most useless because of
their convergence towards the worse . . . (13) What luck would it then bring to the
Romans, if the Persians are deprived of their power and hand over their rule to
another tribe? What mark of honour would the Romans acquire for themselves, if
they reject as suppliant a king who is the most illustrious and bravest of all kings
on earth? . . . (15) How will you accomplish anything more worthy of a king than
this during your entire time of your rule?. . . (20) We have learnt that the usurper
has also sent ambassadors to you, asking to have as a partner the one who has
not committed any fault and cleverly devising all but that a ruler together with
a fugitive slave carry out a revolution. What could be more inglorious and more
abominable than this for the Romans? (21) What kind of foundation of your trust
will he sustain for his promises, a man who has principles of greatest unfairness
and who has mobilised a force against his benefactors, who endorses every kind
of evil-doing in order that he may deprive of his monarchy a ruler who has not
committed any injustice?
27 Higgins 1941: 309.
28 Theoph. Simoc. iv.11.11; according to Theoph. Chron. A.M. 6081 (p. 266, 13, ed. De Boor) Xusrō II
had been adopted by Maurice.
29 Theoph. Simoc. v.3.11; see also Theoph. 266.13. 30 Theoph. Simoc. iv.13.5–6.