Herodotus (3,277 words)

Article Table of Contents

1. [1] The historian Herodotus, approx. 485-424 BC
2. [2] Student of Epicurus
3. [3] Greek physician practising in Rome, 1st/2nd cent. AD
4. [4] Sculptor from Olynthus
(; Herdotos).
[German version]

[1] The historian Herodotus, approx. 485-424 BC

The historian Herodotus.
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

A. Life
Sources on the life of H., the father of history (Cic. Leg. 1,1,5), c. 485-424 BC (fundamental
for all of the following: [1]) are, apart from the information he provided himself in particular, the
Suda s.v. H. or s.v. Panyassis. H. came from Halicarnassus (modern Bodrum) in the southwest of Asia Minor. The names of his father, Lyxes, and his uncle, Panyassis, a famous epic
poet, point to Carian origin. Because of a failed attempt to overthrow the tyrant Lygdamis, H.
fled for some time to Samos; after returning home, he was involved in the final overthrow of
Lygdamis before 454. Because of differences with his fellow citizens, he later left his homeland
forever and emigrated to the panhellenic colony of Thurii founded in 444. According to Eusebius
(Chronica Arm. 83), H. held public readings from his work in 445/4 in Athens and was given
a large fee for it (cf. Diyllus FGrH 73 F 3). In Athens he was also introduced to the circle of
Pericles and made friends with Sophocles who wrote an ode to H. (Anthologia Lyrica Graeca
I3 79 Diehl) and on several occasions made reference to the work of H. (cf. especially Soph.
Ant. 903ff. with Hdt. 3,119; further passages: [2. 3183] and [3. 2ff.]). On the other hand, a
lasting influence of tragedy on H. is noticeable, e.g. in the story of Adrastus (Hdt. 1,34ff.) or the
portrayal of Xerxes (bks. 7 and 8). According to Apollodorus (FGrH 244 F 7), H. was 53 years
old at the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War: the date of birth resulting from this - 484 - should
be about accurate. H. still experienced the first years of the Peloponnesian War (cf. Hdt. 6,91;
7,137; 233; 9,73). In 424 his historical work was available, as several passages from it were
parodied in the Acharnians of Aristophanes (cf. e.g. Aristoph. Ach. 523ff. with Hdt. 1,4; [4.
21014] lists scholars who support a later date of publication). He probably died a little later.
H. went on extended journeys whose chronology is uncertain [5. 128ff.; 6; 7. XVff.]: 1. to
the Black Sea region, base at Olbia (Hdt. 4,17), from there up the Hypanis to the land of the
Scythians (4,81). In the process H. probably also got to know the southern Black Sea coast,
Thrace and Macedonia. 2. to Egypt up to Elephantine and the first cataract of the Nile. In total
about a four-month stay after the battle of Papremis 460/459 (cf. 3,12); from Egypt probably a
detour to Cyrene (cf. 2,32f.; 181). 3. to the Near East, to Tyre (2,44), to the Euphrates (1,185)
and to Babylon (1,178ff.), but not to actual Persia. 4. to the whole Greek settlement area,
among others to the motherland (locations of battles in the Persian War!), Asia Minor, Magna

Graecia and Sicily.

Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

B. Structure of his work

H.'s work is completely extant; the classification into nine books (cf. Diod. 11,37,6) probably
goes back to the Alexandrian philologist Aristarchus [4] of Samothrace who also wrote a
commentary on H. The proem states: This is the presentation of the investigation (histors
apdexis) of H. of Halicarnassus, so that what happened among humans shall not fade with
time nor shall great deeds, some the work of Hellens, some of barbarians, or lose their fame,
particularly however, for whatever blame or cause (ait) they waged war upon each other (on
the proem most recently [8. 234ff.] with literature). H. brushes aside the mythological conflicts
between Greeks and Barbarians (1,1-5) and turns immediately to the historical period, i.e.
the recent past, namely the Lydian king Croesus (c. 560-547) of whom I know that he started
the injustices against the Greeks. Thus, the sequence of the barbarian kings who wanted to
subjugate the Greeks becomes the leitmotif of the portrayal: Croesus (1,6-94), Cyrus (1,141214), Cambyses (2,1-3; 70), Darius (3,61-7,4), Xerxes (7,5-8 end) (on the structure of the work
cf. especially [1. 288ff.] and [9; 10. 47ff.]).
To this single-stranded main narration H. adds an immense wealth of geographical,
ethnographical and historical material in the form of shorter and longer excursuses (lgoi), at
whose ends the main narration is continued where it was interrupted. The individual peoples
(country and people, history, etc.) are always introduced where they first come into contact with
the conquering power Persia. Examples: 1,178-200 (Babylonians); 1,201-216 (Massagetians);
2,2-182 (Egyptians); 3,20-24 (Ethiopians); 4,5-82 (Scythians); 1,142-151 (Ionians); 3,39-60;
120-149 (Samians). The history of the Greek motherland, especially of Athens and Sparta,
however, is presented in several parts that are correlated with each other (Athens: 1,5964; 5,55-96; 6,121ff.; Sparta: 1,65-68; 5,39-48; 6,51-84). In the Ionian Revolt (5,28ff.) the
Persian and the Greek narrative threads are united: H. describes the great Persian War
with a technique of parallel narration, in which the events are represented alternately from
one side or the other up to the clash of the two powers. The expedition of Darius that fails at
Marathon (6,102ff.) is followed by the great campaign of Xerxes, from the decision to go to
war (7,5ff.) through the mustering of his armies (7,59ff.), the battles of Thermopylae (7,198239), of Artemisium (8,1-23) and of Salamis (8,40-96) to the victories at Plataeae (9,19-89) and
Mycale (9,90-107). The work ends with the capture of Sestus in 479 which marks the Greeks'
transition from being on the defensive to being on the offensive. Whether it is complete or not in
its present form is contested (cf. the research review in [1. 152]; on this problem most recently
[12. 47ff.]).
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

C. Genesis of his work

Characteristic is on the one hand the extraordinarily wide exposition with a great amount of
ethnographical and geographical material, and on the other hand a density of representation
that increases as the work develops and that narrates the history of the Persian Wars in an
essentially cohesive way in the last three books. This discrepancy is interpreted biographically

by numerous scholars (this so-called analytical trend was initiated by [1. 205ff., 467ff.] and
further developed especially by [5. 442]; cf. also [13. 36-68]): H. is said to have originally been
a geographer and ethnographer like Hecataeus [3] and in this capacity to have written the
great ethnographic lgoithat were originally independent constructs. Only under the influence of
Periclean Athens did he become a historian and decided to portray the Persian Wars, the great
glorious feat of the Athenians. Accordingly a range of very heterogeneous material went into his
work and was combined into a whole after a fashion. In fact there is, however, much to support
the view that H. planned and wrote his work in the present form from the outset (supporters of
the unitarian faction are among others [14; 15. 360ff.; 4. 32ff.]).
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

D. Sources and historical methods

In the ethnographical-geographical parts, H. now and then uses literary sources, for instance
Hecataeus [3], who forms the basis for i.a. 2,70-73 (FGrH 324a); on the other hand there is
almost a total lack of written sources for the historical parts: H. occasionally uses poetry like
the Persians of Aeschylus, and he also uses inscriptions (e.g. the Snake Column of Delphi,
cf. ML 27 with Hdt. 8,82) and collections of oracles, but neither notable historical works nor
local chronicles, nor lists of officials and victors were available to him. The ancient Oriental and
Egyptian records remained incomprehensible to him. His method of working was essentially
as follows (cf. 2,99; in this regard in particular [16; 17; 4. 35ff.; 13. 44f.]): in the ethnographicalgeographical parts he mainly worked on the basis of autopsy (his own observation) and his
own experience [18], in the historical sections on the basis of oral tradition (cf. the treatises
mentioned in [4. 21134]) that he collected from knowledgeable people, either individuals
(2,28,1; 125,6; 4,76,6; 8,65,6), professional groups (the priests) or anonymous inhabitants of
countries (the Egyptians, the Scythians, the Carthaginians) and cities (the Athenians, the
Corinthians, the Cyrenians etc.) [13. 44].
The assumption that H. quite freely invented the virtually unbelievable wealth of such citations
and should be regarded as a mere arm-chair scholar who only feigned his journeys, his
personal observation and his sources, is an aberration on the part of modern research (this
research faction was established by [19] and still has numerous adherents, e.g. [20; 21; 22 and
23], but on [23] cf. individually the essays quoted and critically discussed by [35. 234-285]) that
actually require no serious refutation ([24] is fully justified in opposing the scholars mentioned
in the previous note who consider the historical work of H. to be a great compilation of lies). In
fact H.'s unique scholarly achievement lies in his crystallization - from the welter, the diversity,
the conflicting oral information that he drew from numerous persons in the most varied of places
- of the history of the Persian Wars as a unity in its form that has become classical, which he
achieved without notable written sources.
H.'s methodological basic principle is: I am obligated to report that which is reported, but I am
not obligated to believe everything; and these words shall apply to my entire representation
(7,152) [4. 34ff.]. This maxim results in the rendering of divergent and partly contradicting
traditions, according to the tendency and view of the respective informants, without H.
supporting the correctness of one version or the other. Thus, for example, an Alcmeonid and a
Philaid tradition in Athens, a tradition for and against Demaratus in Sparta, a Spartan, Tegeatic
and Athenian tradition regarding the battle of Plataeae, exist equally side by side.

Meister, Klaus (Berlin)

[German version]

E. Bias and credibility

With regard to the great thematic framework, it can be noted that H. often acknowledges the
superiority of barbarians, especially the Egyptians, to the Greeks (cf. 2,4; 32; 50; 58; 77; 82)
and always describes the customs and way of life of non-Greeks with great objectivity. His
reports about foreign peoples, e.g. Egyptians, Babylonians, Scythians and Massagetians, also
prove to be reliable to a large extent (cf. [4. 21136]; most recent [25; 26]). With regard to the
main topic, H., similar to Aeschylus, regards the Persian Wars as a battle between freedom
and slavery, democracy and despotism, frugality and luxury, individual competence and the
anonymous mass (cf. especially the dialogue between Xerxes and Demaratus in 7,101-104)
[27. 215ff.], but he should by no means be regarded as a panegyrist of the National War: in his
view the Persian Wars under Darius, Xerxes and Artaxerxes rather brought greater disaster to
Hellas then all the previous 20 generations together (6,98). H. also mentions the mistakes and
weaknesses of the Greeks by name, e.g. their lack of unity, their particularism, their reciprocal
rivalries and disputes, the way in which numerous poleis sided with the Persians, and the
shortcomings of the Greeks of Asia Minor in the Ionian Revolt [2. 565f.]. He does indeed admire
the nmos (law and customs) and the bravery of the Spartans very much (cf. 7,101-104), but
in the passage about Athens (7,139) he regards the Athenians as actual saviours of Greece.
Certainly his admiration for Athens is generally not unlimited, his work must therefore by no
means be considered to be pro-Athenian in its bias (first demonstrated by [28. 474ff.]; cf. in this
regard most recently [29]). In the chronological field H.'s achievements were also considerable
(on this cf. [30]).
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

F. World view and view of history

The transitory nature of all earthly things is a leitmotif in the entire presentation (1,5), and
the cycle of human things is mentioned throughout, especially in the logos about Solon and
Croesus (1,207). Despite occasional rationalism a religious world view predominates that
is manifested in a fateful predestination of events, the idea of the gods' envy and nmesis
(retribution) and the punishment of human hubris by the divine (cf. e.g. 1,30-33: Croesus;
3,39ff.: Polycrates of Samos; 7,35: Xerxes) (cf. [31. 368ff.]). Divine agency is expressed in
omens, dreams, oracles and the voices of warners, but human motivations and decisions are
not unimportant either [32].
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

G. Herodotus as narrative writer

Since Cicero (Leg. 1,1,5) H. has been considered to be not only the first historian but also
the first narrative writer of the West. From the wealth of anecdotes, novellas and stories
the following can be emphasized: the picaresque deed of Rhampsinitus (2,121), the ring
of Polycrates (3,40-45), the recklessness of Hippocleides (6,126ff.), and the horror meal of
Harpagus (1,117ff.). Such tales are not an end in themselves but contain in nuce the elements

of Herodotus' world view; the same applies to conversations, dialogues, and direct speeches
that can often be found in his works [31; 33].
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

H. Language and style

Ancient stylistic criticism (Dion. Hal. Ad Pompeium 3,11 and De Thucydide 23) already
emphasized the poikila (vividness) of H.'s language that reflects the great wealth of content.
Colloquial-style narrative, matter-of-fact reporting style, the linguistic means of the epic, the
tragedy and of Sophistic are the main factors in his stylistic synthesis that as a whole, however,
has a character sui generis. [34].
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)
[German version]

I. Influence
H. had an enormous influence on all subsequent Greek and Roman historiography; on this [3;
4. 40f.]. He prompted the writing of historical specialized literature (e.g. works of Hellanicus,
Antiochus), whilst Thucydides (1,22) formulated his historical method in dialogue with H. (who
is not mentioned by name). The shaping of rhetorical, dramatic or pragmatic historiography
took place only in the Hellenistic period but it is already present, at an embryonic stage, in the
work of H. The commentary of Aristarchus of Samothrace (PAmherst II 12, 1901) shows H., to
be a recognized classic work, and also Plutarch's writing On the malice of Herodotus attests
to his great authority. In the Middle Ages two textual recensions existed; in Humanism and in
the Renaissance H. was known through the Latin translation of Lorenzo Valla (1452-1456) but
well into the 20th cent. he was still regarded as an unreliable inventor of stories. Only in recent
times has H. begun to emerge from the shadow of Thucydides. The universal historical concept
of his work, the breadth of his idea of history, the detailed consideration of the anthropological
dimension as well as the heuristic principle report what is reported among other things
contributed to this [4. 41].
Historiography
Meister, Klaus (Berlin)

Bibliography
1 f. jacoby, s.v. H., RE Suppl. 2, 205-520 = Griech. Historiker, 1956, 7-164
2 schmid/sthlin I 2
3 k.-a. riemann, Das herodoteische Geschichtswerk in der Antike, diss. 1967
4 k. meister, Die griech. Geschichtsschreibung, 1990
5 k. von fritz, Die griech. Geschichtsschreibung, 1967
6 r. p. lisler, The Travels of Herodotus, 1980
7 d. asheri, Erodoto, Le storie, libro 1, 1988
8 k. meister, Die Interpretation histor. Quellen, vol. 1, 1997
9 h. wood, The Histories of Herodotus, 1972
10 k. h. waters, Herodotus, the Historian, 1985
11 h. bengtson, Griech. Geschichte, 51977

12 r. oswald, Gedankliche und thematische Linien in Herodots Werk, in: Grazer Beitrge 21,
1995, 47-59
13 o. lendle, Einfhrung in die griech. Geschichtsschreibung, 1992
14 j. cobet, Herodots Exkurse und die Frage der Einheit seines Werkes, 1971
15 chr. meier, Die Entstehung des Politischen bei den Griechen, 1980
16 k. verdin, De historisch-kritische methode van Herodotus, 1971
17 d. lateiner, The Historical Method of Herodotus, 1989
18 g. schepens, L' autopsie dans la mthode des historiens grecs du Ve sicle avant J.-C.,
1980
19 d. fehling, Die Quellenangaben bei Herodot, 1971 (Eng. transl. 1989)
20 s. west, Herodotus' Epigraphical Interests, in: CQ 79, 1985, 278-305
21 f. hartog, The Mirror of Herodotus, 1988
22 e. hall, Inventing the Barbarian, 1989
23 o. k. armayor, Herodotus' Autopsy of the Fayoum, 1985
24 w. k. pritchett, The Liar School of Herodotus, 1993
25 Hrodote et les peuples non grecs, Entretiens 35, 1988
26 r. rollinger, Herodots babylonischer Logos (Innsbrucker Beitrge zur Kulturwissenschaft,
Sonderheft 84), 1993
27 w. schadewaldt, Die Anfnge der Geschichtsschreibung bei den Griechen, 1982
28 h. strasburger, Herodot und das perikleische Athen, in: w. marg (ed.), Herodot, 31982, 574608
29 m. ostwald, Herodotus and Athens, in: Illinois Classical Studies 16, 1991, 137-148
30 h. strasburger, Herodots Zeitrechnung, in: w. marg (ed.), Herodot, 31982, 688-736
31 lesky
32 l. huber, Rel. und polit. Beweggrnde in der Geschichtsschreibung des Herodot, diss. 1965
33 m. lang, Herodotean Narrative and Discourse, 1984
34 w. schadewaldt, Die Anfnge der Geschichtsschreibung bei den Griechen, in: Antike 10,
1934, 144-168, esp. 158
35 w. k. pritchett, Studies in Ancient Greek Topography, vol. 4, 1982.

Editions:
j. feix, 2 vols. (Heimeran) 51995
a. d. godley, 4 vols. (Loeb), 1922-1938
k. hude, 2 vols. (Oxford), 1926/7
ph.-e. legrand, 10 vols. (Bud), 1946-1954
h. b. rosen, 2 vols. (Teubner), 1987 and 1997.

Commentaries:
d. asheri et al. (Mondadori) 1988ff. (Ital.), one book respectively
w. w. how, j. wells, 2 vols., 21928
h. stein, 5 vols., 4-61893-1908
On book 2: a. b. lloyd, 2 vols., 1975-1987.

Lexica:
j. e. powell, 1938.

Bibliography:
Most recent fr. bubel, Herodot-Bibliographie 1980-1988, 1991.

German translations:
th. braun, h. barth, 2 vols., 21985
a. horneffer, 41971
w. marg, 2 vols., 31980
h. stein, w. stammler, 1984.

Bibliography:
t. s. brown, The Greek Historians, 1973, 25ff.
a. corcella, Erodoto e l'analogia, 1984
h. drexler, Herodot-Studien, 1972
h. erbse, Studien zum Verstndnis Herodots, 1992
Id., Histories apodexis bei Herodot, in: Glotta 73, 1995/96, 64ff.
j. a. evans, Herodotus, 1982
Id., Herodotus, Explorer of the Past, 1991
j. gould, Herodotus, 1989
Id., Herodotus and Religion, in: s. hornblower (ed.), Greek Historiography, 1994, 91-106
d. boedeker (ed.), Herodotus and the Invention of History, 1987 (= Arethusa, vol. 20)
v. hunter, Past and Process in Herodotus and Thucydides, 1982
h. r. immerwahr, Form and Thought in Herodotus, 1966
t. j. luce, The Greek Historians, 1997, 15ff.
w. marg (ed.), Herodot, 31982 (WdF 26)
d. mller, Topographischer Bildkommentar zu den Historien Herodots, 1987
b. shimron, Politics and Belief in Herodotus, 1989.
[German version]
Cite this page
"Herodotus." Brills New Pauly. Antiquity volumes edited by: Hubert Cancik and , Helmuth
Schneider. Brill Online, 2013. Reference. Francisco Corts Gabaudan. 15 December 2013
<http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/brill-s-new-pauly/herodotus-e511320>