Herodotus: "The Histories"
Talk Le Salon Littéraire du Peuple pour le Peuple
Join LibraryThing to post.
This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1LisaCurcio
SUNDAAAY, SUNDAAAAY, SUNDAAAAY, at US 30 Dragstrip . . . .
Sorry, could not resist. For those not from Chicago, I have not gone crazy. Growing up that ad was on the local radio stations every week, and I cannot think "Sunday" without hearing the beginning of the ad in my head.
I wanted to start the first Histories thread, although I doubt I will post until Sunday. I am going to start a "quotes" thread, too, since I already have a few marked.
Slick, try to restrain yourself until Sunday.
Reading plan? For those who are only going to start on Sunday, don't forget that this is the August-September tome which gives us nine weeks. Most convenient since there are nine "books" in The Histories!
See you all on Sunday.
Sorry, could not resist. For those not from Chicago, I have not gone crazy. Growing up that ad was on the local radio stations every week, and I cannot think "Sunday" without hearing the beginning of the ad in my head.
I wanted to start the first Histories thread, although I doubt I will post until Sunday. I am going to start a "quotes" thread, too, since I already have a few marked.
Slick, try to restrain yourself until Sunday.
Reading plan? For those who are only going to start on Sunday, don't forget that this is the August-September tome which gives us nine weeks. Most convenient since there are nine "books" in The Histories!
See you all on Sunday.
2LisaCurcio
Decided to post just one map:
Reconstruction of Herodotus World Map Circa 450 B.C. with credit to this web site:
http://www.henry-davis.com/MAPS/Ancient%20Web%20Pages
Reconstruction of Herodotus World Map Circa 450 B.C. with credit to this web site:
http://www.henry-davis.com/MAPS/Ancient%20Web%20Pages
3slickdpdx
That map is really cool!
I find the maps are too tightly focused without the big picture. Then when I see the big picture, as I know it today, I am ready to look at the older or more tightly focused maps.
Here is a good map of the area Europe/North Africa now: http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/eu.htm
Here is a good map of the Med. Sea area now:
http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/medsea.htm
These maps are all interactive so you can click on a body of water, land or country and get a more detailed map of that particular area.
I find the maps are too tightly focused without the big picture. Then when I see the big picture, as I know it today, I am ready to look at the older or more tightly focused maps.
Here is a good map of the area Europe/North Africa now: http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/eu.htm
Here is a good map of the Med. Sea area now:
http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/medsea.htm
These maps are all interactive so you can click on a body of water, land or country and get a more detailed map of that particular area.
4geneg
I don't know if it was before or after Herodotus, but the Greeks had calculated the size, shape, and weight of the world at some point (fairly accurately, too. Damn those Dark Ages). So they knew there was lots more out there than this map shows, they just didn't know what it was. It was up to the Romans to give a real name to it, one of the most romantic names in all of literature, a name that strikes wonder and adventure in the hearts of all who come upon it, the name of Terra Incognita. As you can tell, there was lots of it.
5elenchus
>4 geneg:
That fact has always impressed me: the Flat Earth outlook wasn't the first view of culture, it came later. And was pervasive enough that it seems to be the default in Western Culture today, unless corrected by education. Amazing.
That fact has always impressed me: the Flat Earth outlook wasn't the first view of culture, it came later. And was pervasive enough that it seems to be the default in Western Culture today, unless corrected by education. Amazing.
6LisaCurcio
Group read leader a little swamped right now, but in the interest of stimulating discussion I am popping in with one initial thought.
Herodotus tells the story of how the "Hellenes" and the Persians came to be enemies by giving a "history" of the interactions between them over a period of time. He frequently qualifies his report by saying it came from certain people. Sometimes, it appears he believes the report and others it is clear he does not. Is this history? Or is this just a rollicking good story?
This question has been debated since the time of Thucydides. Scholars do not agree on one or the other.
Herodotus tells the story of how the "Hellenes" and the Persians came to be enemies by giving a "history" of the interactions between them over a period of time. He frequently qualifies his report by saying it came from certain people. Sometimes, it appears he believes the report and others it is clear he does not. Is this history? Or is this just a rollicking good story?
This question has been debated since the time of Thucydides. Scholars do not agree on one or the other.
7booksontrial
>6 LisaCurcio:: LisaCurcio,
Why are you referring to yourself in the third person?
The debate about history vs story reminds me of what Elie Wiesel said about his own writings. "Some events do take place but are not true; others are, although they never occurred".
Why are you referring to yourself in the third person?
The debate about history vs story reminds me of what Elie Wiesel said about his own writings. "Some events do take place but are not true; others are, although they never occurred".
8Porius
All 'history' is a rollicking good story. Hero-dote-us had more than a little in common with John Aubrey, it seems to me. Before one can get much or little out of history they must read books like SHAPES OF PHILOSOPHICAL HISTORY or even better Louis J. Halle's OUT OF CHAOS. Korzybski's books, anything that warns us away from historians who have the last word to say on the subject. Of course Herodotus didn't know much about all this sort of thing, so he should be read, not for 'history' but for pleasure.
9slickdpdx
Just taking the comments in 7 and 8 and mushing them together with my own perspective: If nothing else, its a fascinating document of what people thought they knew or speculated about in a particular time and place a long time ago. In that sense it IS a true story AND a rollicking good story. I have really enjoyed immersing myself in H's world.
10booksontrial
>8 Porius:: Porius,
Just added Out of chaos to my To Read list. Which Korzybski's book should I start with?
Just added Out of chaos to my To Read list. Which Korzybski's book should I start with?
11Porius
It's tough sledding but SCIENCE AND SANITY is a place you can start. And you can get some good Korzybski information in Robert Anton Wilson's COSMIC TRIGGER Volumes II & III and his COINCIDANCE.
12booksontrial
>11 Porius:: Porius,
Could I trouble you to write a review of Science and Sanity? Based on what I gathered from the Amazon.com reviews, it's a very important but underrated book, and deserves more publicity on LT.
Could I trouble you to write a review of Science and Sanity? Based on what I gathered from the Amazon.com reviews, it's a very important but underrated book, and deserves more publicity on LT.
14Porius
Thirty-Three
BEYOND ISNESS AND ALLNESS
As I mentioned once, and some of you might have noticed on your own, I wrote this entire book without any form of 'is' or 'was' or 'be' or any cognate verb asserting identity. I will now explain this stylistic innovation, and I beg those readers who have encountered the theory before (e.g., in my book QUANTUM PSYCHOLOGY, New Falcon Pub. 1990) not to skip this section.
Back in 1933 - Lawdee-me, doesn't that seem like the Dark Ages now? - both Von Neumann & Korzybski proposed non-Aristotelian logics, as I mentioned many chapters ago. Von Neumann just allowed for a 'maybe' (1/2) between true (1) and false (0); Korzybski extended the 'maybe' as far as you want - or as far as data allows you to calculate the probabilities.
In other words, Von N. gives you a 3-valued logic of true (1), false (0), and maybe (1/2); but K. offers an infinite-valued logic, which may reduce to 0 (false) 1/4 (most of the evidence runs the other way), 1/2 (even-steven), 3/4 (most of the evidence supports the idea) and 1 (proven true); or we can extend this to 0, 1/10, 2/10, 3/10, etc. . . to 10/10 or 1 (true); or calculating with more data, we can extend to 0, 1/100, 2/100 etc. etc. to 99/100 (almost proven) and 100/100 (1/1) or absolutely proven for all time.
Since then Sir Karl Popper has argued, plausibly I think, no proposition can ever reach the level of ABSOLUTELY PROVEN TRUE FOR ALL TIME (1/1) because that would require an infinite number of expiriments,and we haven't done that many exp. yet, nor does it seem likely we can do them in any forseeable future. Any of our theories, however, can reach the level of proven false (0) very quickly, since any failed exp. raises doubt, and a long rigorous series of failed exps. must either indicate that (a) the theory has no relation to expirimental/experiental data, or else (b) some god or demon has rigged the results just to mislead us. The latter choice does not rank as a meaningful proposition in science, altho it might keep theologians (or some academic multi-culturalists) busy with debate for centuries.
The theories that survive this process of repeated experimental challenge longest we may call 'scientific relative successes,' just as the species that survive long periods of natural challenge rank as EVOLUTIONARY RELATIVE SUCCESSES.
From a post-Aristotelian perspective (based on Von N. & K. & others who came later) most of the mysteries and masks explored in this book obviously exist in the MAYBE state. Calculating of probabilities will have to remain subjective, or intuitive, at this time due to the prevailing lack of hard data. For instance, I rank Hollow Earth theories at less than 1/100, and Dr. Velikovsky maybe as high as 1/2 (middle maybe), chiefly because, due to the slanders, polemics and disinformation about Dr. V. circulated by Carl Sagan and his ilk, the catastrophic scenario has just not had a fair scientific hearing yet.
I avoid making sentences with 'is' or its relatives in them because all such sentences have definite semantic defects, the first of which consists in the fact that they make it appear as if one has reached the unreachable 1/1 of proven truth, when in fact one usually only has strong maybe, and (esp. in politics & ideology) sometimes only a weak maybe.
English without the use of 'is' and its cognates, called English Prime (E-Prime), has many other proponents besides me. For instance, Count Korzybski, who urged this reform, but didn't always practice it; David Bourland, who named it E-Prime and does consistently practice it; Dr.Edward Kellog III, who has used it for decades and even talks it. I find that E-P avoids some of the emotionalism of either/or debate; limits statements to what one has actually encountered and endured; cuts off all indeterminate or meaningless jargon before one can utter it; and generally leads to saner, clearer writing. I hope it will even lead me to somewhat saner and clearer thinking, eventually.
(more later)
from Robert Anton Wilson's COSMIC TRIGGER II (My Life After Death)
I find, if anything, all this helps me to sort things out a little better. Of course I am not assisted by tireless ants as was Psyche, who can say this?, I am happy to have this much ammo at my beck & call when I set out on an 'intellectual' adventures.
BEYOND ISNESS AND ALLNESS
As I mentioned once, and some of you might have noticed on your own, I wrote this entire book without any form of 'is' or 'was' or 'be' or any cognate verb asserting identity. I will now explain this stylistic innovation, and I beg those readers who have encountered the theory before (e.g., in my book QUANTUM PSYCHOLOGY, New Falcon Pub. 1990) not to skip this section.
Back in 1933 - Lawdee-me, doesn't that seem like the Dark Ages now? - both Von Neumann & Korzybski proposed non-Aristotelian logics, as I mentioned many chapters ago. Von Neumann just allowed for a 'maybe' (1/2) between true (1) and false (0); Korzybski extended the 'maybe' as far as you want - or as far as data allows you to calculate the probabilities.
In other words, Von N. gives you a 3-valued logic of true (1), false (0), and maybe (1/2); but K. offers an infinite-valued logic, which may reduce to 0 (false) 1/4 (most of the evidence runs the other way), 1/2 (even-steven), 3/4 (most of the evidence supports the idea) and 1 (proven true); or we can extend this to 0, 1/10, 2/10, 3/10, etc. . . to 10/10 or 1 (true); or calculating with more data, we can extend to 0, 1/100, 2/100 etc. etc. to 99/100 (almost proven) and 100/100 (1/1) or absolutely proven for all time.
Since then Sir Karl Popper has argued, plausibly I think, no proposition can ever reach the level of ABSOLUTELY PROVEN TRUE FOR ALL TIME (1/1) because that would require an infinite number of expiriments,and we haven't done that many exp. yet, nor does it seem likely we can do them in any forseeable future. Any of our theories, however, can reach the level of proven false (0) very quickly, since any failed exp. raises doubt, and a long rigorous series of failed exps. must either indicate that (a) the theory has no relation to expirimental/experiental data, or else (b) some god or demon has rigged the results just to mislead us. The latter choice does not rank as a meaningful proposition in science, altho it might keep theologians (or some academic multi-culturalists) busy with debate for centuries.
The theories that survive this process of repeated experimental challenge longest we may call 'scientific relative successes,' just as the species that survive long periods of natural challenge rank as EVOLUTIONARY RELATIVE SUCCESSES.
From a post-Aristotelian perspective (based on Von N. & K. & others who came later) most of the mysteries and masks explored in this book obviously exist in the MAYBE state. Calculating of probabilities will have to remain subjective, or intuitive, at this time due to the prevailing lack of hard data. For instance, I rank Hollow Earth theories at less than 1/100, and Dr. Velikovsky maybe as high as 1/2 (middle maybe), chiefly because, due to the slanders, polemics and disinformation about Dr. V. circulated by Carl Sagan and his ilk, the catastrophic scenario has just not had a fair scientific hearing yet.
I avoid making sentences with 'is' or its relatives in them because all such sentences have definite semantic defects, the first of which consists in the fact that they make it appear as if one has reached the unreachable 1/1 of proven truth, when in fact one usually only has strong maybe, and (esp. in politics & ideology) sometimes only a weak maybe.
English without the use of 'is' and its cognates, called English Prime (E-Prime), has many other proponents besides me. For instance, Count Korzybski, who urged this reform, but didn't always practice it; David Bourland, who named it E-Prime and does consistently practice it; Dr.Edward Kellog III, who has used it for decades and even talks it. I find that E-P avoids some of the emotionalism of either/or debate; limits statements to what one has actually encountered and endured; cuts off all indeterminate or meaningless jargon before one can utter it; and generally leads to saner, clearer writing. I hope it will even lead me to somewhat saner and clearer thinking, eventually.
(more later)
from Robert Anton Wilson's COSMIC TRIGGER II (My Life After Death)
I find, if anything, all this helps me to sort things out a little better. Of course I am not assisted by tireless ants as was Psyche, who can say this?, I am happy to have this much ammo at my beck & call when I set out on an 'intellectual' adventures.
15LisaCurcio
>7 booksontrial: booksontrial: I don't know--maybe just trying to distance myself from my real world. :-)
>8 Porius: Peter, For pleasure, yes, but for history, too, in the sense that history should inform us not just about events, but about culture, philosophies of the time and peoples. In the "prehistories" thread, I mentioned Ryszard Kapuscinski's book Travels with Herodotus. A couple of points he made:
"The first to realize the world's essential multiplicity was Herodotus. 'We are not alone' he tells Greeks in his opus . . .'We have neighbors, they in turn have neighbors, and all together we populate a single planet'."
>9 slickdpdx: slick--not so much speculation, but retelling the various versions of the stories handed down in the various cultures. Truth or myth? A bit of both, of course.
>8 Porius: Peter, For pleasure, yes, but for history, too, in the sense that history should inform us not just about events, but about culture, philosophies of the time and peoples. In the "prehistories" thread, I mentioned Ryszard Kapuscinski's book Travels with Herodotus. A couple of points he made:
"The first to realize the world's essential multiplicity was Herodotus. 'We are not alone' he tells Greeks in his opus . . .'We have neighbors, they in turn have neighbors, and all together we populate a single planet'."
>9 slickdpdx: slick--not so much speculation, but retelling the various versions of the stories handed down in the various cultures. Truth or myth? A bit of both, of course.
16Porius
Fair enough LC. Maybe it would be acceptable to see H. as a travel writer. A sort of Anthony Bordain who isn't so ravenous for vittles all the time. A Thor Heyerdahl. A Tristan Jones. It does get rather difficult the closer you look at it, no?
17booksontrial
>16 Porius:: Porius,
Our Group Leader is busy at the moment, so I'll fill in for her.
Here is my question: How can one use probability to determine whether an event recorded in The Histories is a historical event or an entertaining story?
Our Group Leader is busy at the moment, so I'll fill in for her.
Here is my question: How can one use probability to determine whether an event recorded in The Histories is a historical event or an entertaining story?
18Porius
HOW can one, or how can one?
Well, it seems to me one can do pretty much as one pleases, can't one.
Well, it seems to me one can do pretty much as one pleases, can't one.
19slickdpdx
I don't think there is necessarily an inverse relationship between the accuracy of the telling of an event and its entertainment value.
21booksontrial
>18 Porius:: Porius,
I thought perhaps there was practical application of Korzybski's theory on probability for separating fact from fiction. Guess not.
I thought perhaps there was practical application of Korzybski's theory on probability for separating fact from fiction. Guess not.
22absurdeist
17> Please don't even think for a moment that you can possibly "fill in" for Lisa Curcio. Good Lord, be patient, and give the woman time to respond. "Time" means 48 - 72 hours.
There is only ONE Lisa Curcio, and her name is "Lisa Curcio," NOT "booksontrial," last time I checked.
Hallelujah indeed!
There is only ONE Lisa Curcio, and her name is "Lisa Curcio," NOT "booksontrial," last time I checked.
Hallelujah indeed!
24absurdeist
23> Thanks! My surf photos are quite awesome.
Could you please elaborate (at length if you would) why you referred to me as "dude" rather than "Dude"?
Gee, I'm sorry if I offended you. It certainly wasn't my intention. :) I'm just an ignoramus, after all, wanting to learn more from all you fine folks. And the best way I know how to do it is by asking redundant, annoying, and irritating questions over and over again, that have the uncanny knack of putting the one questioned automatically on the defensive.
Again, no offense. :)
Could you please elaborate (at length if you would) why you referred to me as "dude" rather than "Dude"?
Gee, I'm sorry if I offended you. It certainly wasn't my intention. :) I'm just an ignoramus, after all, wanting to learn more from all you fine folks. And the best way I know how to do it is by asking redundant, annoying, and irritating questions over and over again, that have the uncanny knack of putting the one questioned automatically on the defensive.
Again, no offense. :)
25booksontrial
>24 absurdeist:: EnriqueFreeque,
You're welcome and no offense taken. "uncanny knack of putting the one questioned automatically on the defensive". Very perceptive of you! :) Thanks for enlightening this ignoramus.
You're welcome and no offense taken. "uncanny knack of putting the one questioned automatically on the defensive". Very perceptive of you! :) Thanks for enlightening this ignoramus.
26LisaCurcio
'Rique, thanks for hopping to my defense! booksontrial, thanks for trying to stimulate discussion. I would not have thought to ask that question in quite that way, however. All of the Korbzybski stuff is way beyond me!
As to truth v. fiction: In many instances, Herodotus is clearly writing about things that happened way before his time. Knowledge of "history" at the time was primarily transmitted orally. His use of telling the stories of events before his birth or that happened during his childhood is in the nature of "so and so says". He usually then comments on what he believes is truth. Do you think his perception of truth is colored by his national origins?
Also, significant parts of the stories he relates are what we would call "myth". Discussion?
Running off to work now. Hope you can carry on.
P.S. slick has started a thread to discuss Book One: http://www.librarything.com/topic/96193
As to truth v. fiction: In many instances, Herodotus is clearly writing about things that happened way before his time. Knowledge of "history" at the time was primarily transmitted orally. His use of telling the stories of events before his birth or that happened during his childhood is in the nature of "so and so says". He usually then comments on what he believes is truth. Do you think his perception of truth is colored by his national origins?
Also, significant parts of the stories he relates are what we would call "myth". Discussion?
Running off to work now. Hope you can carry on.
P.S. slick has started a thread to discuss Book One: http://www.librarything.com/topic/96193
27LisaCurcio
Is there anyone out there?
I am constantly amused by the way H relates the stories he is telling. The section in Book One in which he digresses to tell us about "the Persians" is really entertaining. He is writing about people and events that occurred way before his time, and there is no known written record of these events. To the extent that there is a record, it is oral.
Imagine a history being written this way today! Of course, we might think contemporary historians have no more documented information than did Herodotus, but they act as if they do.
I think that our historians exhibit the same types of prejudices that Herodotus did.
I am constantly amused by the way H relates the stories he is telling. The section in Book One in which he digresses to tell us about "the Persians" is really entertaining. He is writing about people and events that occurred way before his time, and there is no known written record of these events. To the extent that there is a record, it is oral.
Imagine a history being written this way today! Of course, we might think contemporary historians have no more documented information than did Herodotus, but they act as if they do.
I think that our historians exhibit the same types of prejudices that Herodotus did.
28booksontrial
>27 LisaCurcio:: LisaCurcio,
Present. :) I didn't get the chance to start Book One this weekend as I had hoped, but will catch up with you soon, hopefully.
Whether written or oral records, one still has to make judgments on their truthfulness. Historians today may have much more data available than Herodotus, but not necessarily more knowledge, or wisdom for that matter.
Present. :) I didn't get the chance to start Book One this weekend as I had hoped, but will catch up with you soon, hopefully.
Whether written or oral records, one still has to make judgments on their truthfulness. Historians today may have much more data available than Herodotus, but not necessarily more knowledge, or wisdom for that matter.
29Mr.Durick
I'm here, and if my copy of The Landmark Herodotus surfaces, I'll even read along.
Robert
Robert
30highdesertlady
I'm here, Lisa... but have not gotten very far into book one yet. Will get busy this week.
31geneg
I'm up to Piesistratus (sp?) and Solon. Very interesting and H is not nearly as dry as I remember him from college.
32Porius
Reading H. when I can find the time. Lucky it's not important to stick to it like a pig to a louse's back. You can read it in little pieces, can't you?
33LisaCurcio
Thanks for checking in, everyone. Gene, amazing what a few years of perspective will do for reading, isn't it? I don't think he is dry at all--I find myself smiling, grinning and sometimes laughing out loud in the midst of all of the subjugating and killing.
P--I think you can read it in little pieces. I find myself doing that all the time. Of course then I have to go back and remind myself who is who. In fact, when I get time I am going to find a chart--I know one of the books I have has one--that shows the genealogical history of the major players.
P--"a pig to a louse's back"??? What a picture.
For those without the Landmark, I wish there was a way to share the maps, photos and appendices. I can summarize some of the interesting information in the appendices, but the other things . . .
On the other hand, when I want to just read without all kinds of annoying superscripts every ten words, I switch to another version. :-)
P--I think you can read it in little pieces. I find myself doing that all the time. Of course then I have to go back and remind myself who is who. In fact, when I get time I am going to find a chart--I know one of the books I have has one--that shows the genealogical history of the major players.
P--"a pig to a louse's back"??? What a picture.
For those without the Landmark, I wish there was a way to share the maps, photos and appendices. I can summarize some of the interesting information in the appendices, but the other things . . .
On the other hand, when I want to just read without all kinds of annoying superscripts every ten words, I switch to another version. :-)
34MeditationesMartini
Just cracked the spine on the Penguin Classics edition! AR Burn is telling me that Herodotus is from Halicarnassus, now Bodrum, where I spent an extraordnarily pleasant few days surrounded by bougainvillea and beaches and the intoxicating air of nargileh nights. An auspicious introduction.
36MeditationesMartini
>35 booksontrial: but you should see my credit card debt.
37booksontrial
>36 MeditationesMartini:, That's nothing compared to the wealth of experience you accumulated. Would you have it the other way around? I didn't think so. :)
38theaelizabet
I'm here! I'm gliding through Book I and listening to some really interesting lectures on Herodotus provided by the Teaching Company. Not much on LibraryThing lately, but will make an effort to check in and read everyone's responses.
39Sandydog1
The Teaching Company is the bomb! I'm a big Professor VanDiver fan.
I finished The Histories late last year, but I'm looking forward to all these discussions.
I finished The Histories late last year, but I'm looking forward to all these discussions.
40marc_beherec
I'm new to Le Salon, and would like to thank Slickdpdx for inviting me to the Herodotus discussion. He's long been one of my favorite authors, since I had the great good fortune to work as a teaching assistant for a foundaitons of Western civilization course.
Regarding the veracity of his history, I think it's important to remember that there's no such thing as an unbiased history. It's also important to consider individual events in Herodotus rather than his Histories as a whole. For example, it's interesting that Herodotus starts out telling what he claims is the Persian side of the story, going back to before the Trojan War -- when it's really clear that these are details from Greek legends.
But Herodotus himself calls his histories his inquiry -- the result of his testing. Sometimes he gives both sides to the story and then weighs in; other times he does not. Finding a "truth" therein may be asking for a degree of certitude which does not exist. But of course we can try thought experiments -- I'm reminded of Baruch Halpern's David's Secret Demons, which reads the Biblical accounts of David's reign as propgandistic cover-ups. He suggests rather plausibly, for example, that Solomon was the son of Uriah the Hittite rather than David, and that the divine curse that David's first son with Bathsheba was killed was concocted to cover this fact up. I suppose we can test Herodotus in such ways as well, though Herodotus himself has already done the testing for us.
It's not exactly true that he's dealing with events from way before his time. Although Herodotus does deal with the distant past and legendry, he is for the most part narrating the events of his grandparents' generation. It would be as though I wrote a history of World War II sitting at the feet of those who fought it. My paternal grandmother told me that as a girl in France she hid under a railway bridge in freezing waters for hours while German tanks passed overhead; my maternal grandfather fought in the South Pacific and told me of when a kamikazee hit his ship and they had to get a man drunk to go into the engine house and remove the body parts. Such a history is different from that which an historian would write from documents, but it's no less "true," in its way. And there are of course those who write histories based on oral history. I haven't read it yet, but I think Colin Davis' Power at Odds: The 1922 National Railroad Shopmen's Strike is such a work.
Someone brought up the issue of national origins -- and it's important to remember that Halicarnasus isn't in Greece proper. It was a Greek colony along the Persian border. I'm sure that influenced Herodotus' outlook, and probably is why he explicitly states that he wants to record the wonderful things brought about by both groups.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to reaquainting myself with Herodotus of Halicarnasus, and reading those sections I'm unfamiliar with. Thanks to Slickdpdx for inviting me and Lisa for welcoming me!
Regarding the veracity of his history, I think it's important to remember that there's no such thing as an unbiased history. It's also important to consider individual events in Herodotus rather than his Histories as a whole. For example, it's interesting that Herodotus starts out telling what he claims is the Persian side of the story, going back to before the Trojan War -- when it's really clear that these are details from Greek legends.
But Herodotus himself calls his histories his inquiry -- the result of his testing. Sometimes he gives both sides to the story and then weighs in; other times he does not. Finding a "truth" therein may be asking for a degree of certitude which does not exist. But of course we can try thought experiments -- I'm reminded of Baruch Halpern's David's Secret Demons, which reads the Biblical accounts of David's reign as propgandistic cover-ups. He suggests rather plausibly, for example, that Solomon was the son of Uriah the Hittite rather than David, and that the divine curse that David's first son with Bathsheba was killed was concocted to cover this fact up. I suppose we can test Herodotus in such ways as well, though Herodotus himself has already done the testing for us.
It's not exactly true that he's dealing with events from way before his time. Although Herodotus does deal with the distant past and legendry, he is for the most part narrating the events of his grandparents' generation. It would be as though I wrote a history of World War II sitting at the feet of those who fought it. My paternal grandmother told me that as a girl in France she hid under a railway bridge in freezing waters for hours while German tanks passed overhead; my maternal grandfather fought in the South Pacific and told me of when a kamikazee hit his ship and they had to get a man drunk to go into the engine house and remove the body parts. Such a history is different from that which an historian would write from documents, but it's no less "true," in its way. And there are of course those who write histories based on oral history. I haven't read it yet, but I think Colin Davis' Power at Odds: The 1922 National Railroad Shopmen's Strike is such a work.
Someone brought up the issue of national origins -- and it's important to remember that Halicarnasus isn't in Greece proper. It was a Greek colony along the Persian border. I'm sure that influenced Herodotus' outlook, and probably is why he explicitly states that he wants to record the wonderful things brought about by both groups.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to reaquainting myself with Herodotus of Halicarnasus, and reading those sections I'm unfamiliar with. Thanks to Slickdpdx for inviting me and Lisa for welcoming me!
41Porius
Welcome Marc. You mention Lovecraft. What do you make of the Hali in HPL, et al., and H's Halicarnasus. I'm a confirmed dilettante in this area so I hope you're not put off by my enquiry.
42Macumbeira
Hi Porius,
how do you connect HPL with Herodotus ?
how do you connect HPL with Herodotus ?
43Porius
Hi there Mac, good to have you back. I don't really connect the 2. I was floating this by Marc to, of course , get a response.
HPL was conversant with all sorts of Ancient Lore, I was wondering about the relation between Hali & Halicarnasus? A naive question no doubt. Maybe nothing to be made of connection of some sort between the two, if connection exists. Most sensible scholars, et al. stay away from this sort of thing. But I got my fill of sensible scholars at the University. I am always willing to look at what the so-called crackpots have to say. I don't swallow any of their findings. I am simply open-minded about 'alternative histories.' What if anything have you to say on this hoary subject?
HPL was conversant with all sorts of Ancient Lore, I was wondering about the relation between Hali & Halicarnasus? A naive question no doubt. Maybe nothing to be made of connection of some sort between the two, if connection exists. Most sensible scholars, et al. stay away from this sort of thing. But I got my fill of sensible scholars at the University. I am always willing to look at what the so-called crackpots have to say. I don't swallow any of their findings. I am simply open-minded about 'alternative histories.' What if anything have you to say on this hoary subject?
44Macumbeira
Didn't Herodotus unearth the great Cthulhu on one of his excursions into the barbarous hinterlands and in the process experienced the "ur" - fright of cosmic emptiness ?
to quote HPL :
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age" "
This quote is more serious than it appears. I see in the world quite a lot of people who "flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age"
to quote HPL :
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age" "
This quote is more serious than it appears. I see in the world quite a lot of people who "flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age"
45LisaCurcio
Mac! So good to see you. Any researches while you were in Greece?
As to HPL's quote, hasn't this happened at least once in human history? Someone commented earlier (perhaps in the "Pre-histories" thread) on the knowledge that was developed by the Ancient Greeks and those who followed them only to have that knowledge buried in the "Dark Ages". There sometimes does seem to be a risk of that occurring in our world, too.
Marc, I hope you will find a bit of time to drop in. You clearly have the knowledge and perspective that I, for one, lack. I don't think we are seriously worried about the "truth" of Herodotus. My interest is for a big picture type of point of view. Certainly your analogy between Herodotus' telling and stories we might have been told by grandparents is apt.
I have a thought, however: In the time-line in the Landmark Herodotus it is estimated that Herodotus was writing from 450-420. The editors estimates the history of Croesus of Lydia and his antecedents to have been from 716 to about 546. Perhaps H could have had first-hand stories for the mid-500's from someone still alive, but most likely not earlier. He would have to have relied on tales handed down.
Finally, (for this morning) it appears that Greece in the Histories is not what we think of as geographical Greece. H describes various "nationalities" as Hellenes--such as the Ionians, the Aeolians, the Spartans, the Lacaedemonians--groups of whom do not live in geographical Greece. H clearly thinks of them as Greeks, however, and includes them in the peoples beaten and subjugated by the Persians, no?
As to HPL's quote, hasn't this happened at least once in human history? Someone commented earlier (perhaps in the "Pre-histories" thread) on the knowledge that was developed by the Ancient Greeks and those who followed them only to have that knowledge buried in the "Dark Ages". There sometimes does seem to be a risk of that occurring in our world, too.
Marc, I hope you will find a bit of time to drop in. You clearly have the knowledge and perspective that I, for one, lack. I don't think we are seriously worried about the "truth" of Herodotus. My interest is for a big picture type of point of view. Certainly your analogy between Herodotus' telling and stories we might have been told by grandparents is apt.
I have a thought, however: In the time-line in the Landmark Herodotus it is estimated that Herodotus was writing from 450-420. The editors estimates the history of Croesus of Lydia and his antecedents to have been from 716 to about 546. Perhaps H could have had first-hand stories for the mid-500's from someone still alive, but most likely not earlier. He would have to have relied on tales handed down.
Finally, (for this morning) it appears that Greece in the Histories is not what we think of as geographical Greece. H describes various "nationalities" as Hellenes--such as the Ionians, the Aeolians, the Spartans, the Lacaedemonians--groups of whom do not live in geographical Greece. H clearly thinks of them as Greeks, however, and includes them in the peoples beaten and subjugated by the Persians, no?
46Macumbeira
Hi Lisa, Good to See you too
Herodotus stories are written after the Persian wars and prior to war of the Peloponessos ( never sure how to write that )
most of the Greek tribes united to fight against a Persian common ennemy but divided and became ennemies afterwards in the power struggle between Athens and Sparta.
The Ionians, aeolians, spartans and Lacaedemonions did live within the actual borders of Greece.
Herodotus stories are written after the Persian wars and prior to war of the Peloponessos ( never sure how to write that )
most of the Greek tribes united to fight against a Persian common ennemy but divided and became ennemies afterwards in the power struggle between Athens and Sparta.
The Ionians, aeolians, spartans and Lacaedemonions did live within the actual borders of Greece.
47Macumbeira
> lapsing back in the dark ages...
Herodotus mentions in the Egypt chapter that the Egyptians claim to have circumnavigated Africa ( in a clockwise direction ).
Herodotus himself does not belief it but in his argumentation he ironically proves to the modern reader that they did indeed.
He says, that when they reached the southest part of Africa and sailed from east to west, the egyptian navigators claimed that the midday sun stood North ( on their right hand side ).
Herodotus can not believe this but as we know today this is correct.
A feat not repeated until Vasco da Gama's epic voyage 2000 years later !
Herodotus mentions in the Egypt chapter that the Egyptians claim to have circumnavigated Africa ( in a clockwise direction ).
Herodotus himself does not belief it but in his argumentation he ironically proves to the modern reader that they did indeed.
He says, that when they reached the southest part of Africa and sailed from east to west, the egyptian navigators claimed that the midday sun stood North ( on their right hand side ).
Herodotus can not believe this but as we know today this is correct.
A feat not repeated until Vasco da Gama's epic voyage 2000 years later !
48geneg
Halicarnassus was just down the hill and around the bend from Halitosis. Most of its residents retired to fresher climes during the summer months when the stink from up the hill drifted into town.
The Lacedaemonians and Spartans are the same people. The Ionians were chased out of the Peloponnese and wound up in Asia Minor (modern Turkey, the Troad). The Aeolians were concentrated in Lesbos and the coast of Asia Minor. They all spoke dialects of the same language and considered themselves Hellenes (Greeks).
Of course this is all after the Dorian invasions which may or may not be a real invasion. Whatever form it actually took many of the aboriginal peoples of Pelops land were displaced and their was a major cultural change from Dorian to Classical Greek, including the language of Herodotus. This seems to have happened on the cusp of the Bronze/Iron Age and parts show up in the foundational myths we find in such works as Aeschylus' Oresteia, and parts of the Homeric myths.
This is mostly from memory with references to Wikipedia. As with most things, it's actually less well known and more complex than I make it sound. This all occurred nearly a thousand years before Herodotus took stylus in hand to lay down the acts of men that they be not forgotten.
If I have led anyone astray, I apologize.
The Lacedaemonians and Spartans are the same people. The Ionians were chased out of the Peloponnese and wound up in Asia Minor (modern Turkey, the Troad). The Aeolians were concentrated in Lesbos and the coast of Asia Minor. They all spoke dialects of the same language and considered themselves Hellenes (Greeks).
Of course this is all after the Dorian invasions which may or may not be a real invasion. Whatever form it actually took many of the aboriginal peoples of Pelops land were displaced and their was a major cultural change from Dorian to Classical Greek, including the language of Herodotus. This seems to have happened on the cusp of the Bronze/Iron Age and parts show up in the foundational myths we find in such works as Aeschylus' Oresteia, and parts of the Homeric myths.
This is mostly from memory with references to Wikipedia. As with most things, it's actually less well known and more complex than I make it sound. This all occurred nearly a thousand years before Herodotus took stylus in hand to lay down the acts of men that they be not forgotten.
If I have led anyone astray, I apologize.
49LisaCurcio
>46 Macumbeira: Mac: The Ionians, aeolians, spartans and Lacaedemonions did live within the actual borders of Greece. I did not mean that they did not live within the borders of Greece, but it would appear that large "colonies" of them also lived in various spots on Asia Minor. As Gene says in #48.
I was responding--not very clearly--to Marc's comment that Herodotus came from Halicarnasus which was not in what we call Greece and perhaps that was why he was willing to acknowledge wonderful things done by the Greeks and by others. (The others are "barbarians", "non-Greeks" or "other peoples", depending on which translation you read.)
I was responding--not very clearly--to Marc's comment that Herodotus came from Halicarnasus which was not in what we call Greece and perhaps that was why he was willing to acknowledge wonderful things done by the Greeks and by others. (The others are "barbarians", "non-Greeks" or "other peoples", depending on which translation you read.)
50Macumbeira
It seems we all agree then : )
51geneg
I don't know if it is in Herodotus or not, but the Greek term for non-Greek speakers, barbarians, came from the "bar bar bar bar" sounds they made when they spoke. Sort of in the same way we say blah blah blah blah when we refer to the sounds of non-English speakers. Barbarians weren't always people who wanted to know what's in your wallet, they were anyone who did not speak Greek. Of course Greek was the language of the gods which made it superior to other languages, in the same way anyone who has ever read the King James Bible knows that God speaks English.
52Porius
Modern research has, it so happens, revealed H. as an exceptionally accurate informant, even on such subjects as Egypt, Scythia, and the outer barbarians, where skeptical 19th C. critics assumed that he was romancing.
The subject of H.'s HISTORY is the successful defense of a democratic, rational, secular society against the onslaughts of what Gibbon in another context altogether was to call barbarism and superstition. However far the narrative may wander, its center is always Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis, the yeoman and merchant seamen in their little bands defying the perfumed might of the Persian Empire - The King of Kings with half the East at heel; illimitable piles of arms, armour, and armament; gold for bridle ornaments and Greek brides; and silk for tents - and all te mysterious gods and priests and shamans gathered up from 4 thousand years of a 100 dead and living civilizations and innumerable barbarisms. Herodotus' book is as closely structured as Thucydides'. It is simply not so obviously schematized a tableau of the conflict of personal vices and virtues. It is the story of the triumph of an idea of civilization. Without this initial concept of the good society as a nursery of integrity and freedom, the stage for the conflicts of Thucydides' stylized heroes would never have existed.
Again and again H. drives home his point with crucial anecdotes. Solon confronts Croesus not as an aristocratic law giver but as a spokesman, in the court of an Oriental despot of incredible wealth and absolute power, of the independent yeomanry of a land so poor that hard work, the cooperstion of equals, and ingenuity in outwitting nature were viruses essential to survival. When the Great King crosses the Hellespont, his flying arrows dim the sun like any massive inhuman natural phenomenon, like an act of God, one of Homer's gods, the embodiment of the frivolity of the nonhuman.
H.'s tone has misled many critics. It is almost colloquial, folkloristic - another Odysseus spellbinding an audience of prosperous farmers with the tall tales of the ODYSSEY. The narrative is so exciting that it has taken the careful archaeology of this century to overcome our tendency to disbelief. Today we know that the Scythians of the Ukraine or the nomads of the desert and the merchants of the oasis cities of the far northeast inter-Asian frontier of the Persian Empire were really as H. describes them. It is amazing that at the beginning of historical and geographical writing in the Western World one man could so carefully have sifted and judged his evidences.
One man did not. The most significant thing about H. is that he is the literary expression of a whole people, as cunning in their ability to deal with facts as their prototype, Odysseus, was cunning to deal with monsters. H. travelled widely and judged rationally of all he saw, but in the vast scope of his story he perforce relied mostly on hundreds of other Greeks who had gone to all the limits of the world with which he dealt, or who had lived before him and handed down to him information on the past, and who were as questioning and as sane as he.
from CLASSICS REVISITED by Kenneth Rexroth
The subject of H.'s HISTORY is the successful defense of a democratic, rational, secular society against the onslaughts of what Gibbon in another context altogether was to call barbarism and superstition. However far the narrative may wander, its center is always Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis, the yeoman and merchant seamen in their little bands defying the perfumed might of the Persian Empire - The King of Kings with half the East at heel; illimitable piles of arms, armour, and armament; gold for bridle ornaments and Greek brides; and silk for tents - and all te mysterious gods and priests and shamans gathered up from 4 thousand years of a 100 dead and living civilizations and innumerable barbarisms. Herodotus' book is as closely structured as Thucydides'. It is simply not so obviously schematized a tableau of the conflict of personal vices and virtues. It is the story of the triumph of an idea of civilization. Without this initial concept of the good society as a nursery of integrity and freedom, the stage for the conflicts of Thucydides' stylized heroes would never have existed.
Again and again H. drives home his point with crucial anecdotes. Solon confronts Croesus not as an aristocratic law giver but as a spokesman, in the court of an Oriental despot of incredible wealth and absolute power, of the independent yeomanry of a land so poor that hard work, the cooperstion of equals, and ingenuity in outwitting nature were viruses essential to survival. When the Great King crosses the Hellespont, his flying arrows dim the sun like any massive inhuman natural phenomenon, like an act of God, one of Homer's gods, the embodiment of the frivolity of the nonhuman.
H.'s tone has misled many critics. It is almost colloquial, folkloristic - another Odysseus spellbinding an audience of prosperous farmers with the tall tales of the ODYSSEY. The narrative is so exciting that it has taken the careful archaeology of this century to overcome our tendency to disbelief. Today we know that the Scythians of the Ukraine or the nomads of the desert and the merchants of the oasis cities of the far northeast inter-Asian frontier of the Persian Empire were really as H. describes them. It is amazing that at the beginning of historical and geographical writing in the Western World one man could so carefully have sifted and judged his evidences.
One man did not. The most significant thing about H. is that he is the literary expression of a whole people, as cunning in their ability to deal with facts as their prototype, Odysseus, was cunning to deal with monsters. H. travelled widely and judged rationally of all he saw, but in the vast scope of his story he perforce relied mostly on hundreds of other Greeks who had gone to all the limits of the world with which he dealt, or who had lived before him and handed down to him information on the past, and who were as questioning and as sane as he.
from CLASSICS REVISITED by Kenneth Rexroth
53slickdpdx
Geez P, how about a spoiler alert?!
On a serious note, I really like the reversal at the end of the Rexroth commentary - "One man did not..." Good stuff. Great writing.
I was hoping Marc Beherec would stop in as, in addition to keeping a good library and having a nice range of interests, he has been engaged on archeological digs in the area from time to time!
On a serious note, I really like the reversal at the end of the Rexroth commentary - "One man did not..." Good stuff. Great writing.
I was hoping Marc Beherec would stop in as, in addition to keeping a good library and having a nice range of interests, he has been engaged on archeological digs in the area from time to time!
54LisaCurcio
Gosh P, I thought that was you writing that!
On a less scholarly note, Herodotus is "folkloristic" and "colloquial" in his tone. That is part of what makes him so readable. How often can we read history and smile so much?
I hope Marc finds the time to drop in--his perspective will be interesting.
On a less scholarly note, Herodotus is "folkloristic" and "colloquial" in his tone. That is part of what makes him so readable. How often can we read history and smile so much?
I hope Marc finds the time to drop in--his perspective will be interesting.
55marc_beherec
I don't think I mentioned Lovecraft here. I believe Porius has looked at my profile. I've written a little on HPL, published in such obscure places that even I don't have copies of my essays.
Regarding HPL and Herodotus (two of my favorite authors), we know that Lovecraft took the name Hali from Robert W. Chambers and Ambrose Bierce. Chambers wrote "The Yellow Sign," in which Carcosa lies on the shore of Lake Hali. Chambers took both names from Ambrose Bierce's "An Inhabitant of Carcosa." But in Bierce's story Hali is a person, not a place. I don't know where Bierce took the name (the context suggests it's some elusive Eastern mystic or poet), but the subject of that story is certainly in keeping with Herodotus' understanding that fortune never rests long in one place, and that "most of those cities which were great once are small today."
I'm not entirely familiar with the archaeology of the area in Herodotus' day, I regret to say. I work on Southern Jordan a few centuries before Herodotus. But I'll say something if I know something.
I was jumping the gun when I said Herodotus wrote about events not long before his own life. I was thinking of the Persian War, and had forgotten that he tried to trace the conflict back to first principles. I think it's telling that Herodotus decided to make the Persian War his focus, rather than the Trojan War, for example -- it's clear he knew Homer, but decided not to imitate his subject matter.
Regarding HPL and Herodotus (two of my favorite authors), we know that Lovecraft took the name Hali from Robert W. Chambers and Ambrose Bierce. Chambers wrote "The Yellow Sign," in which Carcosa lies on the shore of Lake Hali. Chambers took both names from Ambrose Bierce's "An Inhabitant of Carcosa." But in Bierce's story Hali is a person, not a place. I don't know where Bierce took the name (the context suggests it's some elusive Eastern mystic or poet), but the subject of that story is certainly in keeping with Herodotus' understanding that fortune never rests long in one place, and that "most of those cities which were great once are small today."
I'm not entirely familiar with the archaeology of the area in Herodotus' day, I regret to say. I work on Southern Jordan a few centuries before Herodotus. But I'll say something if I know something.
I was jumping the gun when I said Herodotus wrote about events not long before his own life. I was thinking of the Persian War, and had forgotten that he tried to trace the conflict back to first principles. I think it's telling that Herodotus decided to make the Persian War his focus, rather than the Trojan War, for example -- it's clear he knew Homer, but decided not to imitate his subject matter.
56MeditationesMartini
>55 marc_beherec: well, and Herodotus is our main original source for the Persian War now, right? (or wrong--I'm no expert). He must have had Homer explicitly in mind throughout, and in that sense I wonder how much of his formal and stylistic choices were an explicit reaction in the Harold Bloomian sense, as opposed to mere proclivity (for raconteury prose) or incapacity (for epic verse).
57LisaCurcio
Signore Martini, volumes have been written about this! Herodotus has been considered the "prose" version of Homer. I have the Cambridge Companion to Herodotus (at home) and there is at least one essay addressing the issue. I will see what I can do about relating some thoughts later.
59LisaCurcio
From The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus, some discussion of Herodotus and poetry and Homer. These are excerpts with text and footnotes omitted.
Herodotus and the poetry of the past, John Marincola, Professor of Classics, Florida State University
"When Herodotus came to write his history sometime in the mid-fifth century(B.C.E), the medium of prose was a relatively new phenomenon: it was poetry that had dominated discourse for centuries, and had done so in a variety of genres: narrative and didactic epic, personal and choral lyric, hymns, drinking songs, oracles, and epinician odes in praise of victorious athletes."
"That (Herodotus) knew the work of the major poets is beyond doubt, and he cites or quotes more than a dozen of them in the course of the Histories. It is clear, however, that Herodotus was not equally influenced by all poetic genres. Given his own topic and interests, narrative epic was the predominant influence, especially Homer, as the ancients recognized in calling him ‘most like Homer’."
"Homeric influence on Herodotus is an enormous topic, and I cannot do justice to it here; I shall not treat, for example, Herodotus’ evocation of Homer by the use of ‘poetic’ language, even though it is abundantly clear that he was familiar with, and often employed, this language."
"Herodotus as narrator differs, however, from Homer in important ways. The first is in the organizing presence of the Herodotean narrator, for, unlike Homer who only rarely speaks in his own person, Herodotus’ ‘I’ is ubiquitous in the Histories, either on or just below the surface, even if it is not intrusive in equal measure throughout the work."
"Another important area of Homeric influence is in the narrator’s relationship to his subject matter. Andrew Ford has pointed out that although Homer’s heroes are presented as having existed a long time before the poet and his audience, Homer nonetheless portrays himself as an ‘immediate’ narrator of events, recognizing no intermediaries in the handing on of the tradition. Herodotus has a more complicated narrative stance: on the one hand, unlike the effaced Homeric narrator, Herodotus presents himself as the person who has collected different accounts, which has made possible the preservation of the story; he also recognizes previous treatments of some of the material he narrates, especially by engaging in polemic with predecessors. Yet on the other hand, it must be admitted that despite this feature Herodotus in most of his narrative has, like Homer, ‘erased’ his predecessors and for the most part presents himself as wrestling directly with the sources themselves—that is to say, for most of his work he portrays himself implicitly as the first to write up these events."
Herodotus and the poetry of the past, John Marincola, Professor of Classics, Florida State University
"When Herodotus came to write his history sometime in the mid-fifth century(B.C.E), the medium of prose was a relatively new phenomenon: it was poetry that had dominated discourse for centuries, and had done so in a variety of genres: narrative and didactic epic, personal and choral lyric, hymns, drinking songs, oracles, and epinician odes in praise of victorious athletes."
"That (Herodotus) knew the work of the major poets is beyond doubt, and he cites or quotes more than a dozen of them in the course of the Histories. It is clear, however, that Herodotus was not equally influenced by all poetic genres. Given his own topic and interests, narrative epic was the predominant influence, especially Homer, as the ancients recognized in calling him ‘most like Homer’."
"Homeric influence on Herodotus is an enormous topic, and I cannot do justice to it here; I shall not treat, for example, Herodotus’ evocation of Homer by the use of ‘poetic’ language, even though it is abundantly clear that he was familiar with, and often employed, this language."
"Herodotus as narrator differs, however, from Homer in important ways. The first is in the organizing presence of the Herodotean narrator, for, unlike Homer who only rarely speaks in his own person, Herodotus’ ‘I’ is ubiquitous in the Histories, either on or just below the surface, even if it is not intrusive in equal measure throughout the work."
"Another important area of Homeric influence is in the narrator’s relationship to his subject matter. Andrew Ford has pointed out that although Homer’s heroes are presented as having existed a long time before the poet and his audience, Homer nonetheless portrays himself as an ‘immediate’ narrator of events, recognizing no intermediaries in the handing on of the tradition. Herodotus has a more complicated narrative stance: on the one hand, unlike the effaced Homeric narrator, Herodotus presents himself as the person who has collected different accounts, which has made possible the preservation of the story; he also recognizes previous treatments of some of the material he narrates, especially by engaging in polemic with predecessors. Yet on the other hand, it must be admitted that despite this feature Herodotus in most of his narrative has, like Homer, ‘erased’ his predecessors and for the most part presents himself as wrestling directly with the sources themselves—that is to say, for most of his work he portrays himself implicitly as the first to write up these events."
60MeditationesMartini
>59 LisaCurcio: and then there's a complicated interaction between the directness or contingency of sources and whether Herodotus at any given time is telling war history or travel ethnotrivia or both.
