“For many states that were once great have now become small; and those that were great in my time were small before. Knowing therefore that human prosperity never continues in the same place, I shall mention both alike.”
HERODOTUS, HISTORIES, BOOK 1.5; A. D. GODLEY TRANSLATION
DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT AN ANCIENT GREEK SCHOLAR. FOR THE FULL DISCLAIMER, READ HERE
Buy my new book None Escapes Life's Coils: My Journey Through the Plays of Sophocles. Kindle and Paperback versions available.
Introduction
Herodotus (Her-odd-uh-tus) of Halicarnassus (Hal-uh-car-nas-sus) is considered the father of history (or historical inquiry) as we understand it today.1 To press this point home, Herodotus’ work is simply titled Histories—even though his work primarily focuses on the Persian War (the war between the Persian Empire and Greece). He traveled around conducting interviews and looking at documents, curated his findings, and presented it as the work we have today. Rather than contenting himself with eyewitness accounts from Greeks exclusively, he got testimonies from Persians, Egyptians, and other non-Greeks as well. In fact, he states clearly what his intention were for writing his work in the opening lines:
“This is the display of the inquiry of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, so that things done by man not be forgotten in time, and that great and marvelous deeds, some displayed by the Hellenes, some by the barbarians, not lose their glory, including among others what was the cause of their waging war on each other.”
Herodotus, Histories, Book 1.1; A. D. Godley translation
Herodotus wanted to make sure that the Persian War, as well as the amazing deeds of Greeks and non-Greeks during that conflict, was not forgotten. It’s interesting to note, though, that Herodotus doesn’t provide an explanation for why these “great and marvelous deeds” shouldn’t be forgotten. Maybe that will be answered later on?
Herodotus’ work is divided into nine books, with each book being further divided into many sections (Book 1, for example, has 216 sections). You’ll see in the subtitle of this post I wrote “Book 1.1-5.” That means this blog post will be covering Book One, sections one through five. I will be using this method of citation in my journey through the Histories.
How much of the Histories I’ll cover with each blog post will depend on the subject matter. This blog post covers Book 1.1-5 because it’s Herodotus’ introduction and statement of intent. The next blog post will cover 1.6-25 because those sections cover how the famous king of Lydia, Croesus, came to power. I will try my best to cover the sections of the Histories in a way that makes sense.
As always, I encourage you to read Herodotus for yourself. You can do it! Plus, unlike modern history textbooks, the Histories is very interesting. There are a lot of fun and thought provoking stories within its pages—like the story of a thief who robbed a king and kept evading capture, or the story of Solon the Athenian telling King Croesus who the happiest man he ever met was (it wasn’t Croesus, much to his chagrin). There’s also some hilarious sections—like Herodotus’ attempt to describe the hippopotamus, or the time a priestess of Apollo told the Greeks to combat the Persians with a wall of wood.
I will be quoting from the A. D. Godley translation of the Histories, which is in the public domain. It seems to be pretty straightforward reading. No having to navigate outdated English grammar. If you want a modern translation, the only one I have experience with is the Aubrey de Sélincourt translation published by Penguin Classics. There is also The Landmark Herodotus which appears to have a lot of maps and annotations to make it more user friendly (it’s almost 1000 pages though; this is compared to the 700 pages of the de Sélincourt translation which includes an introduction, endnotes, and index). I have no experience with The Landmark Herodotus, so I can’t speak to how good it is.
Summary
Herodotus of Halicarnassus explains the purpose of his work: to record the great deeds of both Greeks and non-Greeks so they won’t be forgotten. Herodotus also wants to record why the Persians decided to war with the Greeks.
According to the Persians, it started when Phoenician traders went to the Greek city-state of Argos. On their last day, they abducted the princess Io and sailed away to Egypt. Sometime later, some Greeks sailed to the Phoenician city of Tyre and abducted their princess, Europa. These two wrongs effectively balanced each other out.
However, a group of Greeks then went to the Colchian city of Aea and abducted their princess, Medea. When the Colchians demanded her return, the Greeks refused. After this, the Trojan prince Alexandrus (Paris), after learning about Medea’s abduction, went to Greece and abducted Helen, figuring that would balance out the Greeks’ abduction of Medea. When the Greeks’ demands for Helen’s return were rejected, they invaded Asia2 and sacked Troy.
This, according to the Persians, is what led to their hatred of the Greeks: the Greeks invaded Asia before the Persians invaded Europe.
Herodotus states he’s not interested in whether the Persians’ account is true or not. Instead, he’s going to give an account of what he personally knows about the Asian aggression against the Greeks.
The Historiography of Herodotus
Historiography is the method used to present an historical account. It is also it’s own branch of knowledge which studies how history has been presented. What is the person’s purpose in presenting his account? What biases does he have? What sources does he use? How does he use those sources? What sources does he ignore? Why does he ignore them? Historiography looks at all of those questions and more.
Herodotus clearly lays out his intent for writing his account in the opening lines of the Histories which I quoted above: he wants to make sure that the deeds done in the Persian War are not forgotten. He then implies that one of the methods he used was finding out what different people said about this or that event. So, we can break down Herodotus’ historiography like this:
Purpose: To record the glorious deeds of Greeks and non-Greeks.
Motivation: To make sure these glorious deeds are not forgotten.
Methods: Inquiring Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, etc. about what they know.
Biases: Herodotus is a Greek from Halicarnassus which will color his perspective on events. Herodotus is also writing after the Persian War ended. The fact that Herodotus knows how the war ended will affect how he presents his account. Hindsight is 20/20 after all.
Herodotus’ historiography will continue to come out as we journey through his Histories. Be sure to be on the lookout for it!
The Persians Give Greek Legends the “Scholarly” Treatment
If you’ve been with me on my journey through the Western Canon from the beginning, you’ll notice a few familiar names: Alexandrus (Paris), Helen, and Io.
Paris was the Trojan prince who seduced Helen, considered the most beautiful woman at the time, and took her back to Troy with him to be his wife. This was despite the fact that she was married to Menelaus, the king of Sparta and brother of Agamemnon. This ultimately led to the ten year Trojan War which ended with Troy’s destruction. You learn most of this in the Iliad and the Odyssey.
Io, who was a character in Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound and referenced in Aeschylus’ The Suppliants, was a woman who caught the eye of Zeus. Zeus forces her into exile and turns her into a cow in order to hide her from his (rightfully) jealous wife Hera. However, Hera sends a stinging gadfly to torment Io, as well as a monster with eyes all over it’s body to keep tabs on her. Io eventually makes her way to Egypt where Zeus sleeps with her. Her descendants include famous warriors like Perseus and Heracles.
Europa is an unfamiliar character though unless you were really paying attention in the Iliad.3 She’s another woman who Zeus was enamored with, except he ended up abducting her and taking her to Crete.4 Her son was the famous king Minos, of the Minotaur and the Labyrinth fame. Minos’ grandson was Idomeneus, a middle-aged warrior and king who fought in the Trojan War and is a character in the Iliad.
Lastly, Medea is unfamiliar unless you’ve read the legends about Jason and the Argonauts or have read Euripides’ play Medea. She was a Colchian (read: non-Greek) sorceress who helped Jason get out of a bad situation. They ended up marrying and having children. Saying anything more than that will spoil Medea (and the Argonautica, which is not on my list but well worth reading).
I’m guessing by now you’re noticing major differences between my description of these characters and Herodotus’ description. Herodotus’ account of these characters effectively takes all the mythological elements out of it. Notice what Herodotus says, though:
“These are the stories of the Persians and the Phoenicians. For my part, I shall not say that this or that story is true…” (1.5)
Herodotus, Histories, Book 1.5; A. D. Godley translation
And before this point, he wrote multiple times “The Persians say…” and then gives the non-mythological account of a character or event.
This raises an observation and some questions.
The observation is that the Persians (and Phoenicians) are the ones providing these more “realistic” accounts. They don’t subscribe to the accounts of these characters and events as told in Greek legends. They have no reason to, as Greek legend and mythology is not a part of their culture. This allows the Phoenicians, for example, to go so far as to cast one of the women, Io, in a negative light—claiming she ran away, rather than being abducted, because she got pregnant out of wedlock by a non-Greek. What do the Phoenicians care if Io is made to look like a whore? She’s not one of their legendary figures.
Also, blaming the Greeks for certain abductions and aggressions, rather than the machinations of deities, gives the Persians an excuse to make polemical statements against the Greeks. It justifies their aggression against the Greeks.
The Persians and Phoenicians effectively give these Greek legends the “scholarly” treatment, by providing “rational” explanations for events. We’re all familiar with this kind of treatment—especially if you’ve been deep into biblical scholarship. The sort of detached (allegedly) explanations of events by people who supposedly have no dog in the fight. By doing this, though, they effectively reveal their own biases. They reveal their ulterior motives for wanting to provide these more “down to earth” accounts.
The questions I have are:
Did Herodotus include these accounts because he believed them as well?
Connected to the question above: If he believed these more “rational” accounts, was Herodotus qualifying them with “The Persians say…” to hide himself from scrutiny?
Or, was Herodotus truly just showing his readers what the non-Greeks said? Maybe as a curiosity or to show how absurd those silly barbarians are?
Either way, I’m glad Herodotus wrote those accounts down.
That's all for the Histories, Book 1.1-5.
May your days be filled with grace.
-Andronikos
Kindle and paperback versions available.
Find me on social media!
The books list I am going through.
Thumbnail: Roman bust of Herodotus, 2nd c. AD. Public domain.
1The English word “history” is derived from the Greek word historia and means simply “investigation.” The word “inquiry” in the opening lines of Herodotus is that Greek word from which we get the word “history.”
2Troy was in modern day Turkey. Remember that Turkey, as well as modern day Iran (where the Persians were from), is considered a part of Asia.
3She is simply mentioned as “The daughter of Phoenix” in the Samuel Butler translation. In other legends, she is the daughter of King Agenor, the Phoenician king of Tyre. The fact that “Phoenix” and “Phoenician” are close sounding words makes you think.
4This is why Herodotus speculated that the Greeks who abducted Europa came from Crete.