Herodotus: The Histories (Texts from Ancient Greece Book 2)

After the victory at Plataea, Pausanias shows himself a man of principle, refusing to impale the head of Mardonius for public display and laughing at the luxury of the Persian general. Collecting the spoils of victory, the Greeks dedicate a tenth of them to Delphi in a memorial that Herodotus has apparently seen.

For the moment all is well, but Herodotus does not allow us to bask in the glory of the defense of freedom; instead we follow the Athenians as they pursue the Persians to the Hellespont and then apprehend and punish a Persian governor by crucifying him and stoning his son before his eyes.

The popularity of the History was legendary, and its influence is evident from the time of its completion in the s onward. Most significant is the response of Thucydides, who despite not mentioning his predecessor by name clearly wrote in his wake. One successor simply called him a liar Ctesias in Fragmente der griechischen Historiker T8.

The interesting problem that emerged already in the fourth century, as the genre of history separated itself from other sorts of prose inquiry, was the larger purpose to which historical narrative might be put—education, persuasion, and even entertainment. Herodotus, with Thucydides, belongs in the middle of the debate. Herodotus himself knew that many Greeks would not like his judgment on the Athenians as saviors of Greece. The important point is that Herodotus made judgments; he was a critical historian of the past, not a simple collector of data. Offering judgment on the basis of evidence is what the historian did—and does.

Here again, through his text and the discussion that his text provokes, then and now, Herodotus shows himself a historian worth reading. Edited by Karl Hude. Edited by Haiim B. London and New York: Translated by Robin Waterfield, with an introduction and notes by Carolyn Dewald. Oxford University Press, Translated by Andrea L. Purvis, edited by Robert B. Strassler, with an introduction by Rosalind Thomas. Brill's Companion to Herodotus.

The Religion of Herodotus. The Historical Method of Herodotus. University of Toronto Press, Marincola, John, and Carolyn Dewald, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus. Cambridge University Press, Ethnography, Science, and the Art of Persuasion. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single entry from a reference work in OR for personal use for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice. Publications Pages Publications Pages. Search within my subject specializations: Medicine and health Music Names studies Performing arts Philosophy.

Don't have an account? Sign in via your Institution. Life of Pericles c. Pericles [At this Site] Thucydides c. Pericles' Funeral Oration Book 2. The Mitylenian Debate Book 3. The Melian Dialogue Book 5. Pericles' Last Speech Book 2: On the Kings of Sparta , c. The Polity of the Spartans , c. The Spartan War Machine , c. Civil War in Corcyra E Book 3. This one caused the outbreak of war. The Plague of Athens B-Book 2. Life of Alcibiades c. Life of Pelopidas c. Back to Index The Fourth Century: Competing Hegemonies Xenophon c.

From Life of Epaminondas d. The Beginning of Philip of Macedon's Reign , c. Philippic I [At Perseus] Aeschines c. On the Embassy , full text [At this Site] Plutarch: Accounts of Personal Religion , c. Cosmogony and Theogony [At enteract. Labors, Death, Apotheosis [At enteract. Hymn to Demeter Homeric Hymns: Various Texts [At enteract. On Initiation Phaedo 69 [At enteract. Even in the house of Hades there is left something.

The mead of asphodel, where the spirits dwell. In particular, von Fritz asserts ff that when he composed Book H, Herodotus was working not as a fully mature historian, but as someone interested mostly in geography and ethnicity. We can then say Herodotus makes a claim of a "self determined objectivity.

See a Problem?

In this self determined objectivity he creates a paradigm of historical narrative that has influenced all future attempts to study or record history in the Westem world. The term ioTopia for Herodotus encapsulates the process of discovering. Not the transcendental tmth, as we in the modem world conceive of it, but the past. This may be seen as Herodotus' representation of what is "tme. The term normally translated as tmth is dXr 6Eia literally a state of "not forgetting. He emphasizes the fact that his material is gathered from oral sources which preserve memories of the past, such as local legends and folklore, and even goes to great lengths to point this out.

We may not fully understand this order he has created, but it is nonetheless there, and any denial on a modem reader's part of this order is due to an inability to grasp the existence of a stmcture as opposed to the lack of one. Called by Lloyd Herodotus' ATyuiTTous Xoyos, it previously had been dismissed by the field as either garbled recollections of half remembered traditions or fanciful creations by Herodotus to liven up a travel tale. The only major treatment before recent times of the episode was by Wiedemann in The search for the origins of Greek culture has become more important in our modem society, as the search for history is ultimately the search for identity and the search for identity has become paramount in an intemationally expanding world; whether in tmth or hopeful fantasy, Westem society still largely claims Greece as its progenitor, despite the fact that most institutions that are attributed to Greek origins resemble them only on the surface.

This argument hasflaredup with the advent of a type of scholarship that attempts to question traditional views of Westem academic beliefs. With the " H. Scholars Press, , , Introd. Lloyd, Herodotus Book E Leiden: Brill, , ix. That Westem scholarship has frequently been an exercise in bigotry and ethnocentrism is a self- evident fact.

It has long been used, under the veil of some sort of scientific methodology, to substantiate the status quo of social conditions. What better way then to debase this type of scholarship than to attack it at its source: Herodotus' claims in Book n, to the effect that the most important aspects of Greek culture were transmitted in some manner from Egypt have provided the opponents of traditional Classical scholarship with the means to use its own weapons against it. Lawrence Hill Books, Also, the section on race in Mary Leflcowitz and Guy Rogers, ed..

Herodotus' Histories

Black Athena Revisited University of North Carolina Press, , for a current treatment and substantial bibliography conceming the issue. Classical scholarship in particular, and of academic study in general, throwing Herodotus back into the center of a wide ranging discussion of identity. Presentism and presentist attitudes are vimlent and rampant diseases in the discussion of Herodotus. As stated above, it is inevitable that one approaches any subject with his or her own political, temporal, national, gender, and emotional presuppositions.

This is especially tme when dealing with the Classics, since it is one of the most ideologically precious areas for the traditional conception of Westem culture and its heritage. For example, organizations such as the Society for the Preservation of Greek Heritage sometimes appear to act as if scholarship that threatens the paradigm of Greece as the autochthonic progenitor of Westem culture somehow diminishes the worth of the Greek "Heritage," whatever that may be.

Herodotus' examination explores the tales of the origin of Westem civilization, and he has therefore become a focal point for a number of vehement discussions on the origins of the Classical Greek world, and by extension the hitherto dominant conception that Westem culture has about its history and historical identity. While the current argument raging between the radicals of Afrocentric studies and the reactionaries of Classics has highlighted Book H, unfortunately their debate is ultimately damaging to our understanding of it.

They are removing Book n from its context, twisting it and abusing for their own agendas. Bemal constmcts an elaborate and colorful, but ultimately a faulty argument for Egypt as a source of Greek culture. This is where my inspection of Book U comes in. I propose rather than approaching the Histories with any particular cultural agenda, to dwell on it for what it is: Rather than working from traditional views of the Histories, however, I want to dissect the discursive stmctures inherent in the Egyptian description.

By examining the text, I hope to uncover the ideological agenda and stmctures behind Herodotus' choices in his account of Egypt. Using the modem critical idiom, however, a new method of examining Herodotus' work emerges. We can speak of Herodotus presenting a new discourse. When I use the word discourse, I am not using the definition used by Mabel Lang in reference to Herodotean speech, merely the exchange of information directly or indirectly between two or more parties.

Hence I am generally speaking, when using the term discourse, of any system that involves an active exchange of ideologically loaded statements Mvth as History New York, NY: Leflcowitz in her attempt to refute Bemal's argument also does considerable injustice to the material. Harvard University Press , Mabel Lang deals with the more general problems of analyzing the sometimes problematic discursive stmctures of Herodotus and how these stmcturesftinctionas motivating factors within the text as a whole.

However, I take a different approach than her; rather than applying predetermined stmctures to Herodotus' text in order to clarify his processes, I instead hope to reveal these stmctures inherent within the text by examining it in a critical manner consistent with modem literary methods. Viewed through the stmctures of the text, the methodology of Herodotus reveals as much about his environment as his reports do.

Yet the process of recording events supercedes any sense of objectivity: It is this ideology that needs to be scmtinized so that we may begin to understand the Histories better as a document. In beginning this investigation, I am positing that Herodotus did indeed consciously compose every aspect of Book U with a preconceived ideological and cultural agenda. Rather than assuming that it is a barely coherent gathering of disparate oral traditions, by examining the order and contents of the events and customs he has described, I hope to prove that there is an underlying unity that does indeed tie the Egyptian book to the rest of the Histories in a deeper and more emphatic way than has previously been assumed.

Instead of being merely an interesting digression, and perhaps an amalgamation of some traditions of Greek origins, it is a calculated attempt to give cultural legitimacy to afledglingGreek identity. That is to say, Herodotus is attempting to ground Greek society in the oldest and greatest culture known to him, Egypt. Whether this assertion on the part of Herodotus is based in any way on "facts" is of limited importance at this stage of the investigation. Routledge, and is based largely on the work of Michel Foucault. Charles Fomara has attempted to approach the difficulties of connecting the Histories as a whole to Book n from an authorial perspective, i.

This falls into the trap that has plagued Classical studies since its creation, the problem of using a single work to recreate an authorial presence. In Herodotus' case, we are "blessed" with a number of biographical works by other authors, yet these too were stmggling for the most part under the same burden of reconstmcting Herodotus from the Histories.

Reading in a simplistic manner and ignoring the stmctures that are embedded within Book n, Fomara claims that Herodotus is in fact just "an author of a lively book about Egypt, its geography, the people, their customs, religion, and history. He also claims that Book n lacks the moral and philosophical exploration that is present in Book I. In particular Fomara cites the "simple" stmcture and progression of Book n as proof that it is an "imperfect" product as compared to the rest of the Histories.

In order to produce a work based almost wholly on the text itself my main source will be Herodotus. I will examine key passages in Book II, transitional phrases, and specific accounts and descriptions of Egypt and Egyptian culture. I will then discuss a number of common themes expressed by these key sentences or passages.

Among these themes, I will look specifically at how Herodotus uses time as a tool with which to establish the supremacy of Egyptian culture over the rest of the world.

Guide to the classics: The Histories, by Herodotus

Prehistoric time becomes an actuality in Egypt, and there is a national memory stretching back beyond the mists of recorded Greek time. Also, I will look at how the physical setting is described and used in Book II and how it relates to Herodotus' agenda. How and what Herodotus describes reveals a purposeful hand moving towards an ultimate goal. In particular, I will look at how Herodotus uses his precise, if not literally accurate, measurements and his attempts at cartography to bind Egypt into the physical world, again attempting to establish the legitimacy of Egypt's presence in Greek Identity.

Herodotus, in a manner similar to his attempt to separate the past from the realm of folklore, wants to remove Egypt from the mythological world and recreate it within a Greek reality. I will also explore the human actions and events existing in the chronotope Herodotus establishes in his narrative. Along with apparently banal comparisons of the culinary, weaving, and urinary pracfices of Greece and Egypt, I will especially examine the most important and controversial of his cultural comparisons, namely that of the religions of Greece and Egypt.

The cmx of many of Herodotus' arguments in Book U, is the belief that antiquity equals authority, and that if two cultures share a parallel custom, then the older is the originator. In conclusion, I will use the findings of the investigation of these key parts of the Egyptian description to form a picture of the narrative stmcture and ideological agenda of Book H. Ultimately this investigation cannot answer all the questions about Book H, much less the Histories as a whole. What I hope to do, however, is to open up a new line of inquiry into the text, not as fact or fantasy, but as an ideological document preserving precious evidence of what the Greeks thought of themselves and wished to think of themselves, transmitted through Herodotus' attempt to constmct a "national" Greek identity in the face of its immersion into an intemational conflict with unforeseen results.

1. Herodotus: Book II;
2. The Histories.
3. Baby Cat and Mouse Amigurumi Crochet Pattern.
4. In This Entry.
5. The father of history.
6. Commentary on Joel.

At the beginning of the second chapter of Book E, Herodotus introduces the topic of antiquity, particularly that of the Egyptians, into his narrative. Herodotus used the antiquity of Egypt, through the citation of the King Lists, not only to trace its history, but also, by associating Greek cultural and mythological events with these dates, to establish a legitimacy in the temporal sphere for Greek culture.

The basic nature of the experiment is that Psammetichus wished to discover which civilization was in tmth the oldest, and in order to discover that, he had two newbom children vEoyvd isolated completely from any cultural ' Lloyd, 2. The name is also used in Book VE, but refers to a different individual. By using irpiv Herodotus indicates that previous to Psammetichus, i. It was only in relatively recent times in the Egyptian scheme that any examination was felt to be necessary. Why is this important, and why would Herodotus point out that until the reign of Psammetichus, the Egyptians had never questioned their authority?

The reign of Psammetichus in chronological terms lies closer to the emergence of Greek identity than it does to the high point of the Egyptian Empire. In the period comprising the height of Egyptian power i. PaaiXEOoai there was presumably or at least according to Herodotus, no attempt to examine this claim of primacy. Therefore, despite the widely accepted belief in the antiquity of the Egyptians in the historical scheme of the Greek perception of the world, this assertion, rather than simply being assumed, must be proved for it to function in Herodotus' narrative plan.

Here we have the failure of simple vocal inquiry to discover some fact or "tmth. This conflict of the One and the Many leads not only to other theories of Pluralism and Atomism, but also to a linear perception of creation and, in tum, of history. E originally there is One, then it follows that there are Many that come after this One, and then that their existence is in fact the result from the One. E everything in the world originated from a single source and if one removes a person from all resultant cultural contamination then whatever remains is entirely derived from the original form.

Here is the cmx of the Herodotean post hoc ergo propter hoc argument, and it is based, despite its fascination with Egyptian culture, solidly in Greek philosophical soil. Ultimately the experiment tums against the Egyptians, and it is "proven" that the Phrygians are in fact more ancient than they are. Atfirstthis seems to undermine the assumption that Herodotus chose Egypt as his great giant of antiquity.

Egypt's position is justified by philosophically and experimentally sound methods in the mind of Herodotus and of his audience. Houghton Mifflin Company, , especially pages In particular Heraclitus' examinations into the opposites of which the universe is comprised provide a conceptual background with which Herodotus would have been familiar. It is at this juncture that Herodotus enters into a discussion on perhaps the most controversial aspect of Book E: There is a large conflict here between what the Greek says and what Herodotus was attempting to communicate.

In his later description of the Pelasgians E. In fact Herodotus uses this term, ETTcovuMias, in referring to the gods as independent entities, but also uses it in reference to Homer's and Hesiod's naming of the gods E. Lloyd suggests that ouvonaTa should be read for ETTcovunias, in concord with Herodotus' later statement that the ouvonaTa of the gods came from Egypt B. At the beginning, as we have seen, he first attempts to establish the precedence of Egyptian antiquity through language, and now he moves on to religion.

The term used for the naming of the gods, i. By setting up an unquestionable yet not completely defined relationship between these two religious systems, he not only creates another proof of the antiquity of Egypt, by citing the obvious age of Egyptian religious practices, but also sets a path for the Book to develop along, a path that will define this relationship closely as his investigations and interviews continue, thereby drawing the audience along, as if they were part of a natural discovery process, and validate his assertions all the more.

Yet the only likely cognate for his examination here is the Egyptian Ennead. Yet the Ennead contains normally not 12, but 9 deities. Psdt, or the Ennead, "cycle of the nine gods. Here is a prime example of one of the many difficulties that Herodotus encountered in his travels, that of communicating through two languages. From most of Herodotus' work, we can infer that he was notfluentin the language of Egypt and did most of his work through translators.

The Olympians and the Ennead are both the prime grouping of the deities of the respective cultures, so it seems to be a natural mistake despite the obvious problem of twelve not being equal to nine. Herodotus could also be constmcting a paradigm of relation based not on surface, or even reality, but on the essence of the respective systems, therefore their actual numbers would be mostly immaterial. By doing this, he breaks down the barriers of visible relations, and the objections one would make on observational grounds to the relationship between Greece and Egypt he is trying to make.

At the end of chapter 5 and after a description of lake Moeris and the explanation of the draining of the swamps of Egypt, Herodotus begins a long and often overlooked section of Book E concemed with the geography of Egypt and those lands surrounding it. If we accept that Herodotus is creating a new origin for Greece as a cultural entity, he could not very well have situated the starting point for Hellenic culture in a semi-fictional land that, while known, was completely undefined in the ideological paradigm of the Greece that Herodotus is trying to influence.

In summary, Herodotus describes the following facets of Egyptian geography: While Herodotus' accounts do not always as a mle match the physical remains left, there are two very important points that must be accepted in dealing with his descriptions of the geography of Egypt: See Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin: His descriptions have a very definite purpose. To find this purpose let us begin with the formal pattem he uses to introduce his topics. Hisfirststatement is that the silt from therivertravels out a full day's sail from the coast.

This is thefirstreference to his theory of the alluvial nature of the country of Egypt. After determining the length of the coastline, he then uses a noteworthy parallel in constmcting distances. Excavations in the Heart of Classical Athens London: Thames and Hudson, While both the altar and the milestone of Augustus were actually removed from major road ways, the Panathenaic being the only major road the altar of the 12 gods was close to, nonetheless they both were intimately associated with the idea of distance in their respective cultures and appropriate ideological metaphors in the sense that they would immediately conjure the appropriate images for the audience.

Also in accordance with his forthcoming theories of the Egyptian origins of the 12 Olympians, this only serves to remind his audience, as Herodotus begins a large section that does not seem to be immediately relevant to his argument conceming religion, that this topic of religious dominance is not forgotten. The other milestone used for the distance comparison also serves a more sinister purpose than atfirstassumed. Also, the pediments are decorated in accordance with a sense of identity after the repulsion of the Persian invasions. Not only has Herodotus managed to bring in a physical reminder of distance, the altar in Athens, in order to familiarize his audience with his description of a place location of the Altar of the Twelve Gods see John Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens New York: His audience would have known and remembered the actual constmction of the temple.

By using an object so recent in time, his description of Egypt is not only physical, but it is current as well. Egypt is a place with definite boundaries now, but more importantly, rather than merely a constmct existing in the past, it has contemporaneous existence as well. Herodotus makes another bold assertion in chapter He seems to be motivated by his interest in alluvial development, as this was a fascinating subject for most Ionian philosophers.

While topographically there is a great similarity between the geographical processes of alluvial depositing in the Nile valley and on the Scamander plain, one can not ignore the implications here. Herodotus has bound Troy with Egypt, in the mind of his audience.

Herodotus has placed Egypt along with the Diad and the Odvssev. Praeger, ,, for more in-depth examinations of Olympia's architecture and history. E one looks at the geography of the areas around Miletus, especially because of the Meander, one can see a possible origin for the extreme interest that Ionian philosophers had in alluvial deposits in reference to the creation of the world.

Herodotus has yet to stress the maimer in which many aspects of Egypt behave in a way opposite to the rest of the worid, at least the rest of the worid as seen by his Greek audience. Rather than being merely an interesting aside conceming an exotic country, it is instead a careftilly implemented plan to use Egypt as an ideological tool. The Nile is by far the largest geographical feature of the Egyptian landscape, and often the use of its name refers to the entire country by synecdoche.

The Nile, however, behaves in opposition to all otherriversknown to Herodotus, i. As well as its actions, Herodotus is interested, like any Greek of his time following the Ionian tradition, in the origins of theriver. Unlike his other investigations, no definitive answer can be found. We hear of two prevailing Greek theories, which Herodotus summarily dismisses, to put forth his own third theory, based on his own observations.

This seems to be a divergence from Herodotus' previous process of painstakingly defining every minute detail of the geography of Egypt.

As we shall see in the development of his narrative throughout the book, this dissolution of the factual as it travels temporally backwards is instead a counter-approach that he will use to attempt to seal Egypt's role as the progenitor of Greek culture. Having finished with his exhaustive description of the geography of Egypt, Herodotus now prepares to delve into the cultural peculiarities of the Egyptians themselves. His opening sentence indicates a logical relationship between the unusualness of the Nile and the unusualness of the population surrounding it.

This begins the description of the 'topsy-turvy' nature of Egyptian daily culture. Gender roles are reversed in both urinary and social practices, with the female taking the dominant role, whether it is in business, family, or physical labor. The religious practices and appearances of the priests differ greatly from the Greek model as well. There are multiple levels to Herodotus' purpose in these descriptions.

These precise descriptions bring the people of Egypt alive for his audience. He describes their everyday routines, creating breathing subjects with which it is possible to relate. The veracity of the claims is again a moot point, it is not completely relevant to this study that yes, indeed, many Egyptian households had interior toilet areas, or that men did weave in a professional capacity in Egypt. In order for Greece to have its origins in Egypt, Egypt has to become a real place for his audience, but it cannot become too familiar.

Herodotus' goal to a certain extent is to give legitimacy to the Greek national identity emergent after the Persian conflict, not to replace it with one that is purely Egyptian. Hence, while in the process of attempting to subtly bind Greece to Egypt with his narrative, Herodotus must also create enough distance that will not only allow Greece to keep an individual identity but ultimately to show this identity as an improvement over its origins.

Again Herodotus uses phrases like irdvTcov dvSpcoTTcov to set Egyptian practices in opposition to the rest of the world. Since this issue of religion it so central to Book E's agenda, it stands to reason that Herodotus would need to emphasize once again the importance of religion in Egyptian life. As well as using this to provide an origin, he employs the zeal of the Egyptians as a contrast to the current Greek model.

The emergence of Pre-Socratic thought into the mainstream caused a new era of investigation based not on just pure knowledge, but on empirical tmths derived from experimentation and observation. As Herodotus describes the fervent attitude the Egyptians hold to religious custom, their scouring of drinking vessels daily, their refusal to eat unclean animals, and the absurd practices of insuring the purity of sacrificed animals, he creates a twofold picture.

One the one hand, admiration for their strict adherence to their religious beliefs is no doubt aroused in Herodotus' audience. Yet, there has to be a sense of the Egyptians being trapped by their devotion, for they could in no way question or examine their practices because of the zealousness of their performance of them. This anti-intellectual attitude no doubt sounded backward and a bit mstic to the mind of the 5 century Greek like Herodotus or his audience, who was experiencing the world in a new way, not bound by religious observances, but engaged in the physical examination of their environment.

We can say therefore that the Greeks, speaking in general terms about Herodotus' audience, may have admired the piety of the Egyptians in reference to their religious adherence, and might even feel a sense of pride that their own religious practices may have originated in such places. Yet a Greek would also feel alienated from the static nature of the continuation of such vigorous actions without any real introspective examination of the practices themselves. This introduces the main distinctions that Herodotus will draw between Greek and Egyptian culture.

While Egypt has chronological precedence in both the existence of its nation and its religious practices, it is to a certain extent completely defined by the life it has led in the past; the Egyptians' anfiquity, and hence their religion, are remnants from Greek pre-historic time. Greece on the other hand is a mobile culture. The intellectual climate is energetic and the world is now open to a new interpretation. Tmth is no longer rehgious doctrine, instead it has become an empirical solution.