AMERICANPHILOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION MonographSeries

FORMANDTHOUGHT INHERODOTUS
Henry R. Immerwahr

edited by Walton Morris

Number23 FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS by HenryR. Immerwahr

ScholarsPress Atianta,Georgia
Areprint of the1966edition, publishedby thePressof WesternReserve University Cleveland,Ohio 44106

PA I "iooH ]T:'jmi

xviii

ABBREVIATED REFERENCES

Thefollowingbooksappearedtoolatetobegivenmorethancursory attention: Bum,A.R.PersiaandtheGreeks: TheDefenceofthe West,c.546478B.C. (London1962). Frye,R.N. TheHeritage ofPersia (Cleveland1963). Hignett,C.Xerxes^ Invasionof Greece (Oxford1963). Huxley,G. .Early Sparta (Cambridge[Mass.]1962). Maronitis,D. N."EpwesoroS<>os TOV 'HpoZorov (Salnica1962). Marontis,D. N.EHuayuyy^ urv*Hp68oTov (Athens1964).

INTRODUCTION
I

When thework of Herodotus was'finally published, probably aftertheauthor'sdeathduringtheearlyyearsofthePeloponnesian War, so radical were the changes that'had taken place in the intellectualclimateofthedaythatboththeformofthisworkand its underlying philosophy must haveseemed strange to contem poraries. The sophistic movement, already active in Herodotus' earlier years, had begun towin thedy. Among th tragedians, Euripides was questioning established views regarding the re lations of gods and men, as well as therelation of man and the state. Crias and others used lyric poetryfor novel ends. Most important for us, technical prose writings were appearing in quantity,amongthem worksonphysicalscience', medicine,geog raphy,and,inparticular,historyitself,aSweseefromthechrono logicaltreatisesofHellanicus'andHippias.Atthesametime,both tragedyandrhetoricwere beginningtochangetheGreeksense of style.TheseweretheyearsinwhichThucydides,byhisown'testi ihony,wascontemplatinganewkindoflustoryunderthestimulus ofthe sophists,'rhetoricians,and'the newtragedians. If Herodotus' work nevertheless made a profound and lasting impression, this was due'not so' much to his style or to his philosophy, but to the patrioticimportance ofits subject matter and tothe fact thatit preserved so muchoral material.Though Thucydides recognized Herodotus as his great predecessor, yet his own style, and hi philosophy, came to differ vastly from thoseoftheearlierhistorian.Xenophon,whoimitatesHerodotus' styletoadegree,isfarremovedfromhiminthought.Onecannot help feeling that in the latefifth century, and in the fourtli, Herodotus' Histories were read primarily for their content, an impression confirmed by certain localhistories and geographical tracts which supplement, and sometimes correct, hiS work.^
xjacoby,Entwicklung 118;RESuppl.2.506508; Atthis (Oxford1949) 149ff. and 221;Lionel Pearson, TheLocal Historiansof Attica (Lancaster [Pa.]1942), indexs.v. Herodotus.Cf.thetestimonia inStein'seditio maior (1869and1871). Fortherelation betweenSophoclesandHerodotus(their affinitygoesback tothe
1

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

INTRODUCTION

Only muchlater did Hellenistic and Roman rhetoriciansreturn toHerodotus asa modelofstyle. AsimilarfatehasbefallenHerodotusinmoderntimes,although for somewhat different reasons. Nineteenthcentury scholarship, pursuing the notion of scientific history, believed itself to have found akindredspirit inThucydides, whoappeared tosubscribe to the doctrine that the histprian must construct his own inter pretation of events on the basis of facts ahalyzed apcording to strict method. By contrast, Herodotus seemed the victim of the traditions he followed so closely, and his work appeared a con fused and rather untrustworthy collection of tales. However, in theperiod followingthe First WoridWar, contemporaryideasof history,its methodsandmeaning, havechangedsoradically that the superiority of Thucydides over Herodotus, (considered as thinkersrather thanassources) nolongerobtains. Contemporary scholarship is thus better able to understand, and sympathize with, th very different presuppositions of the two greatest of ancienthistorians.^ Theincreased interestin recent and contem porary history, caused by j;he vents of the lastfifty years,'has brought about a change in historical methodology, with the result that the strict methods of the classic nineteenthcentury historians, based on theimpartialanalysis ofold written recor4s' canno longerbe amodel forall thetypes ofhitory that.neeto bewritten.Atthesametime,therehasbeenagreatdealofinvesti gationintothemeaning ofhistoryitself,,particularlyinEngland, Germany, and the United Stats. The result has been a serious questioning of the socalled scientific aspects of historiography, and the further development of the social spiences so dear to Herodotus' heart. Some presentday works on recent history resemblehis Historiesa gooddeal more.^han theydoThucydides. Critical judgment pn the merits of Herodotus in thelastfifty years has ke|)i; pace with trese changes in historical outlook. Abouf theturn of thecentury, thefirst stepswere,tatentoshow
fortiesofthefifth century),seeTat undGeschichte 540,bote 73;P.MacKendrick,CW Geschichteder griechischen Literatur^ (Bernand Munich1963) 303and339, andDie tragischeDichtung der Hellenen (Gttingen1956) 102,note3. For two modern, "nonprofessional" assessmentsof the relative merits of ^rodotusand ThUcydides,see the chapter onHerodotus in R.J.Collingwood's TheIdea of History(Oxford 1946),andAubreydeSelincourt's TheWorldof Herodotus (London1962) 22,3637, and37374.

Herodotus' accuracy in describing the Persian Wars (Hauvette, Grundy),andlaterthesamewasdoneforsomeofhisethnographic descriptions (Spiegelberg, Sourdille). If these studies remained withintheframeworkofstandardnineteenthcenturyscholarship, the continued discussion of the organization of the work had brought FelixJacoby, by1913, to thepoi^t where he began to recognizethesupreme mastery"ofHerodots" organization.Now, thoughJacobyhimself wasinterested primarilyin thetraditional question of the ordfcr in which the parts of th Histories were actually composed,yet in the course of his analysis he began to seetheimportanceofstructureforitsownsake :'*^itisnoexaggera tion to say that the art of Herodotus in the arrangement of material hesin the manner and the placingof hisdigressions,"^ Jacoby's study forms the dividing line between the nineteenth centuryestimate ofHerodotus and thatof thetwentieth. In the twenties, however, scholarship atfirst took a different turnwiththediscoveryofthexistenceofanarchaicstyleinboth prose and poetry.This seemed toits discoverers vastly different from theclassicalstyle^a conception'thatperhaps needsmodifi cation today, since it draws too strict a distinction between the archaicandtheclassicalfeelingforform.Yetitwasthisdiscovery which led HermannFrankel to tlierfirst^defimtion of Herodotus' style, although he based it upon what Aristotle had observed about early prose style. Simultaneously, the growirig under standing of early Greek thought ffected a new appreciation of Herodotus'basicideas;thisappreciationis reflectedinanimpor tant paper by Otto Regenbogen in Die Antike. These develop ments in Germany thus led to thefirst real appreciation of Herodotus' work: Max Pohlenz' pioneering book of 1937^. If Germanythus took theleadininterpretingHerodotusin hisown terms, the great edition by Legrand in France, and the recent book bySirJohnMyresin England,also showa radicalrevision ofpreviousjudgments onHerodotus.
Jacoby, RE Suppl. 2.380. For a general survey of scholarship, see Myres, Herodotus,Ch.II. *Frankel,Stileigenheit.Regenbogen, Werk.Pohlenz,Herodot. sLegrand,Budeedition,especially theIntroduction^ (1955)and theJ^rw/e*analytique (1954).Myres,Herodotus.Forrecentbibliography,seeP.MacKendrick,CW47(1954) 14552 and ibid.56 (1963) 26975; G.T. Griffith in M.Platnauer's FiyYears of Classical Scholarship (Oxford1954) 152ff.; EClds6 (1961),fase.32;W.Krause, AAlt 14(1961) 2558;Marg,Herodot 748ff.Earlierbibliography:Sievekmg, Herodot.

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS II

INTRODUCTION

ThechangeintheestimateofHerodotusisduenotonlytoour peaterawareness ofthe natureof early Greek thought, butalso oaslTonginterestinthenonscientificaspectsofhistory.History, ,t e^tofthe earlynineteenth century,can again beseen as the most humanisticand least exactof thesciences.As suchit is not solelyarationalconstruct>asedonevidence,but,morethan that acollective memorym whichmen acquireselfknowledge bythe contemplation of the past. History is, as it were, inland's autobiography, and thus, at any one moment, it reaffirms the relation between p^tand present in a new way. The historian, notinganddefimngthespconnections,isnotascientistworking in isolation, but participates in the "stream of consciousness" ofhis owngeneration.,Thefunctionof thehistoricalimagination comists in the preservation of theimportant aspects of the past as theseare reflectedin older traditions,which are. formedintoa newand h,ving tradition;thisis doneby selection,emphasis, and combination,on the b^isof pertain abstract notions which give lustoryits umty.The historianreconstructs thepast by usingall tiie aspects of imagination except invention. All'history like poetry, is.myth, for history is representation and interpretation mconcreteform Aristotle'sfamousdistinctionbetweenhistoryas e^ing pnnapally with what happens fo occur, and poetry as deahng with what might logically occur, is a most dangerous octane,ifturned intoafundamental criterionfor thedefinition ofhiscry.'Ifhistoryismyth ofaspecialkind (mythrestricted to actual events as remembered ip tradition),,then the historian must bea wnter,not inorder to beautifyhistory, butinorder to un erstand it.His analysis ofevents is by nomeans confined tp
"'s""/?"'"'!>connection, to the remark, by Professori.A.

WU;. JournanTe
^istotlcmeant todistinguish absolutelybetween historyand^Sl" S^Aeisi eSVand (Berkeley'1954) 1ff., 0/O, and73ff. Actuallyheseenisrathertohavedistinguishedbetween a Enlrei^Bcdeu ungdAristoteles frdie GeschichtsschreUung,"FoLtion Eniretumsur I anUquiU classique4 (1956)85ff.. and, recently F W HutoryandTragedy,"Historia9 (I960) 217f. (withearlier biblLraohvi Of T.S.Brown, HerodotusandhisProfession," 59(195354) 829ff '

the question of cause and effect, but also'includes thesymbolic meaningof actionsseen by themselves,as wellasjudgments con cerning these actions based on certain moralor more generally affectivestandards.The historian cannot do without dispensing praiseor blame,for by this means heestablishes thesignificance of the past for the present, and without thissignificance history losesoneof its principalfunctions.History combinesscienceand artwith theeducationalaimof persuadingone'sown generation ofcertedn aimsin lifewhich areupheld by a particular visionof thepast.Inthissense, historyisalways actual. Thecombinationof educator,scientist, andwriter isthe chief characteristicof Herodotus, who fhrst discovered history as a methodof understandingthe world as a whole,and madeit the equal of poetry and philosophy. He differsfi:om Thucydides in constructinghis accountnotdirectlyon thebasisofevidence, but bycombiningexistingtraditionswhichincorporatesuchevidence. When h began to collect information,such traditionswere still ingoodpartoral.Consequently,whatheregardedastheprincipal wayofgainingaccesstdthepastwasinfactoraltraditions,andhe wasconfident that,ifevaluated properly, theycould bemade to mirror past events accurately, His own contribution, in turn, consistedin thecombining andarranging of traditions,with the result that his own work became henceforth a Hving tradition for the present andfuture. This was possible only by accepting as much as possibleof thefacts, as well as the bias, in earlier accounts: his work thus presents itself as a summary of past historical thought as well as of facts. This does not mean that Herodotus was uncritical, or that he accepted "all that was told." On the contrary, he has a clear conception of what constitutesthebest tradition,andofthelogios anr,orknowledge able man, as the best witness. He also tested traditions by his own experience,set variant accounts against one another,like a judge listening to witnesses,^ and applied internal criteria of truthbycomparisonofvariantsandbyhisowncriticalreflection,^'
Causation276. *Gh.I,note40. Causation276. The word used for the comparison of variantaccounts is ovuaXXevdai (e.g. 2.33.2;2.112.2;ctc.SecPoweU,Lexicons.v.ov/^AAw,no.5).Itisthebasisforforming ajudgment {aviiaXfitvos evptoKw, 4.15.1; 7.24.1;7.184.1;8.30.1). Thewordhere translated "reflection"is itisformed either by comparison of accounts or sometimes on the basisof general verisimilitudeand logical probability (e.g.2.27:

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

INTRODUCTION

Traditions were not allof equal value:some could be matchfed with fact and others not, a distinction Herodotus expresses by speaking of the right and false roads "traveled by" tradition, andofthe"logosthatis"incontrastwiththe"logosthatis not." Theworkof Herodotusincorporatesthe memoryof theGreeks about their own history and unifies it by the deeper (because more comprehensive) understanding of thehistorian. In partic ular, his judgments regarding the great Eastern kings, and the judgment (ormyth, asit might properlybe called) ontheroleof theGreeksinthePersianWars,werealreadyformed,notwithout inconsistencies,in the traditions preceding Herodotus..Itshould not be forgotten that the Persian Wars,awhen viewed from the Orientalpointof view,were notimmediatelydecisiveforthefate of the Persian Empire, as they appear to bein Herodotus' con struction,onthe basisofGreektradition,ofthe mythofthegreat strugglebetweenEastandWestaninterpretation,correctinthe final analysis, that has been accepted not only by scholars, but bythegeneralconsciousnessofWesternculture.^Historicaltruth as Herodotus understood it is not simply a matter of factual accuracy, but includes the overall interpretation of events and their possibleinfluence onourlives. Historical knowledge in Herodotus moves on three levels: events,traditionsabout events,and thehistorical work whichin terprtsthesetraditions.ThroughouttheHistories,Herodotusmain tainsthefiction that.hiswork isan oral account, evenwhere we knoworsurmiseittabebasedonwrittensources. Hecoulddoso
argumentfrom e/ifos;cf.2.56.1; 4.31.1;etc.). Thewhole complexof methodsneeds further investigation; cf. Rev. Crahay 208. See also A. Leskyj Gesch. d.griech. Lit.* (Bernand Munich1963) 35152. Whaveheretwo' distinctnotions :(1 )theideaoftheroadtraveledbythelogos, forwhichseeO.Becker,DasBilddes fVegesundverwandteVorstellungenimfrhgriechischen Denken {Hermes, Einzelschriften, Heft,4[1937]), and B. Snell, "Das Symbol des Weges,"inDieEntdeckung desGeistes* (Hamburg1955)320ff.;and (2)theideaofthe truthcontentsof thelogos,anidea whichisexpressed bythephrases6 wvAoyosandf oO*ctv Aoyos: see e.g. L. Woodbury, HSCP 63 (1958) 15556; W. van Leyden, DurhamUniv.Journal (194950)95 (= Marg,Herodot 178). ^'For the Oriental point of viewsee A. T. Olmstead, "Persia and the Greek Frontier Problem,"CP 34 (1939) 305fF., and Hist.Pers. 151ff.;F.Schachermeyr, "MarathominddiepersischePolitik,"HZ 172(1951)<I35 (butcf.thecorrectionsby K.Kraft,Hermes92 [1964]15358). E.g.2.73.3:"theysay"(thefollowingaboutthePhoenix);thestoryisactually fromHecataeus,anditincludesverbalquotations(Jacoby, I,F324b).Herodo tus'usesA^yv rather than ypc^cif quiteconsistently both of hissources and of his

because thelarger part of hissources was in fact oral, and also becausehehimselfseemstohavelecturedonhistoricalsubjects.^ The written work as we have it thus has an oral prehistory of somelength inHerodotus' ownlife (and before that,in his oral sources),anditnodoubtreproduces Herqdotus'styleoflecturing,^ aswellasthestyleoftheaccountsheused.However,theprimary gain that results from the.oralfiction is ^n immediacy through whichtraditionappearstoreflecteventsdirectly,andwithoutthe intrusionof thehistorian's ownthought.
Ill

Thepresent investigation is not concerned primarily with the merits of Herodotus as a historian, but attempts to analyze the work as it stands and to define some of its leading ideas.Since his work exhibits a particularly close connection between truth and tradition in the arrangement and unification of divergent storiesfromthepast,itsformpresentsthe mainclue toitsunder lyingconceptionofhistory.ThebestmethodofstudyingHerodo^tus seemsto usa closeinvestigationof narrativestructure,andofthe stylisticmeansbywhich,thisstructureiswrought.Onthesimplest level, Herodotus' workis a prime example of archaic parataxis, by whichshort individualitems are placedin arow to build up largercompositions.Inthismanner,individualaccounts,orparts thereof, arecombined in Herodotusinto larger pictures,like the pebblesin a mosaic.Thefirst partof thisstudyis devoted to an investigation of the mannerin which suchsmall parts areeven tuallycombined intoalargeunified whole. In order to approach this muchdiscussed problem we must first clear awaysome misconceptions.For along time, the,study
ownaccount.Wherehedoes useypi^av, thereisusually aspecial reason:citherhe wantstoemphasizeexactitude (e.g.1.95.1;2.70.1 ;2.123.1 ;etc.),orthenotoriety of aperson orevent (2.123.3;7.214.3).Differently Powell,Hist.Herodotus3132. "Jacoby,RESuppl. 2.39!^ff., hasproved that mostof Herodotus' information cametohimthroughhisowninvestigationandwasthusoral;cf.nowalsoC.Hignett, Xerxes' Invasionof Greece (Oxford1963) 29ff. OnHerodotus asapublic lecturer,see Jacoby,RESuppl.2.242,andPohlenz,Herodot20810.1agree,however,withPowell, Hist. Herodotus 34, that Sophocles' imitationof Hdt.3.119 in Ant.90420 proves a writtenversion of thatstoryin 442 B.C.,but I would hesitate todraw aijyfurther conclusions about the composition of the work from thbisolated fact. Differently H.Erbse,RhM,n.s.98 (1955)97103. Pohlenz,/feroifot20810.K.J.Dover,GreekWordOrder{C&mh^e1960)1011.

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

INTRODUCTION

of Herodoteapstructur hs been carried on under theshadow ofthegeneticproblemofhowtheworkcametoassumeitspresent form.Insofarasitisinterestingtoknow theintellectualbiography of'Herodotus, tWs is in itself an'important question, but it has nothing todowith thefresentinvestigation.Tor,apartfromthe fact that genetic explanations must, by the very nature of the kindofevidnctheyuse,beofthemosttentativekind,wewould understandthepresentworknobetterbyknowingthatHerodotus had planned earlier to write a work of a different character. Genetictheoriesoperateupon theassumption thattraces ofsuch earlier conceptionssurvive in thefinal version, and that we can recognize them unequivocally for what they are. This is true, however,only whenthefinal stageis veryincompletelyfinished, and a number of remnants of earUer conceptions are evident whichconflictwith thefinal stageandhaveneither beenelimina ted nor adjusted'. The genetic approach is by necessity largely negative in its judgment of thefinal version, since it canjiot succeed withoutfinding imperfections, and thusis aptto lead us awayfromasympatheticunderstan^ngofthetext.Furthermore, a'knowledgeofstyle andstructureisa prerequisiterather thana consequence of th study of origins, since all too often the in consistenciesonwhichsuchastudyisbasedturnouttobestylistic peculiarities.^^ Related to this misconception is the mistaken emphasis often placedbyscholarsupontheallegedlyunfinishedstateofthework. As Jacoby has summarized the evidence, it is clear that the Histories arenot afinished book in the modern sense,since they contain several promises by the author which are not'fulfilled inthe present wbrk.^'However, suchlack offial revisionis not necessarily evidencefor lack of completion, since the manner of composition of the Histories differed substantially from,thatof a modernbook. IftheassumptionofHerodotus'lecturingactivities iscorrect,theindividualpartsoftheworkmusthaveundergonea longprocessofrevisioninoraldelivery.Undersuchcircumstances, thework did nottake shapeinastraightline (asitwere), butits different layers became inextricably fused. Essentially, the re
On the genetic question secJacoby, RESuppl. 2.330ff., and Powell, Hist. Herodotus. Jacoby, RE Suppl. 2.37279. Tat und Geschichtt 512, note 25. Cf. E. Meyer, Forschungen1 (Halle/S1892) 189f.;HowandWellson7.213.3.

lation of oral tradition,lecture, and written work resembles the Homericproblemoftherelationofshortepicsto thelUd,except thatthe processof transformationfallswithin asinglelifetime. Consequently, theevidencefor lack.ofrevision cannot be used to prove lack of completion. Evidence for the latterdefinitive in thecase ofThucydidesconsists for Herodotus largelyin the dissatisfaction felt by many scholars with the brevity of theend of the work.This judgmentis basedon tasteratherthan logical analysis and cannot befully supported by proofs. Our notion of an elaborate epilogue basically derivesfrom rhetoric,just as the notion of a climax is dramatic. In Herodotus, thefinal portion of astory is always open tofurther attachment, and thisis true alsoof thework asa whole. Theend ofthe workas wehaveit makesreference to,anumberoffundamental imagesand themes, in particular the ideas of the separation and balance between Asia and Europe, Whileasequeldealing with thelater phases of theconflict withthe.Persians (perhapsdown tothe formation ofthe Delian.Leaguein478B.C., oreven tothe peaceofCallias in 449 B.C.) could easily be attached to the Histories, sucha continuationwould> conflict.withtheidea ofbalance byitsstress onaggression in theformationof theAthenianempire atheme perhaps adumbrated, but certainly" not developed, in the last chapters of the work. Such' asequel would also devaluate the Greek victories of 480 and 479 B.C., as Xenophon'sHellenica destroys thedramaticstructure ofThucydides. Thebreak atthe endof479 B.C.,as establishedinHerodotus,wasaccepted byhis successprs, in particular by"/Thucydides himself, and has rightly entered ourown historical thinking as selfevident.For this reason and theothers mentionedabove,I doubtthat Herodotus ever thoughtof extendinghis:workbeyond itspresentlimits, but evenifhedid(suchmatterscanhardlybeproved),theassumption ofthefragmentarynatureoftheHistorieshelpslittletowardatrue understandingoftheworkaswe,haveit.'Thepresentstudy,being devoted to an analysis of what we^actually have, excludes any
" Ch.Ii;4849;ph.III,notes188,189, and192! " Ch.III,1^47. oThucydidesin'1.89ff.begins hisaciunt'of thefiftyyear periodfollowing the Persian Warswith thesiegeand captureof Sestus, whidilasted into the winter of 479B.C.Thisinturnisthelasteventmentioned, byHerodotusintheworkaswehave it;seeabove,note17,andcf.N.G.L.Hammon, CR,n.s.7(1957)100f.,andA.L. Jeffery,AJP83(1962) 52,note15 (onpage53). Hammond'sdivisionsdifferslightly fromours.

10

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

INTRODUCTION

11

consideration of the reconstruction of a work that was never written. A third misconception is theimportanceoften attributed toa knowledge of actual historical facts for the study of the organi zation of a historical work. Since a historian deals with factual truth,andsince hisaim in reproducingit is (at leastin part) to be accurate, the temptation arises to compare hisinterpretation ofevents with what weconjecture tohave actuallyoccurred and withour view of theimportance of theevents described by him. Believingourselves topossess a betterknowledgeof theperiod he deals with, we are then apt to judge Herodotus while trying to understand him,and thusfallvictimtothe tendencytodisregard ide3,s wehave reason tothink erroneous. Many modern analyses of Herodotean battle descriptions are excellent examples of this sortof misconception,forHerodotushas thereputationof having little understanding of military matters.The fallacy here lies in the assumption that the modern historian has access to a more immediate understanding of history, than did Herodotus, an assumptionerroneousin principleaid particularlydangerousfor the period of early Greek history, where other sources are ex ceedinglyscarce. Thisdoes not mean that'themodern historian doesnot havetherightto.criticizeHerodotus (forhe isin asense his equal, although never his superior):it does mean that the evaluation of Herodotus as? a historical source should not be confused'withHteraryanalysis.Thuswehavetried,wherepossible, toavoid discussionsinvolvinghistoricalfact, treatingthe workas anorganic unitintelligible byitself.'Onlyin certaincases, where Herodotus'accountisincomplete,orelliptic,doesoutsidehistorical informationhelptoelucidatethetext.Theanalysisofthe structure and style of the work may be useful, in turn, to the historian bypreventinghim from reading modernideas intothe Histories, butthe twoapproachesshould never beconfused. Thusthe task ofdiscovering principles oforder in theworkis best carried out apartfrom any other considerations, important as these may bein themselves. I know ofno other ancient prose work where the investigation of structure yields so much the matic material. Ideasappearing in theorganization are thereal aimof thisstudy.Such themesare notidenticalwith Herodotus' opinionsasexpressedinvariousdirectstatementsbythehistorian^ althoughfor the most part they do not confradict them. Hence

we will not in thefirst instance discus? what Herodotusthought about religion, political institutions, or even the purposes of his Histories,interesting assuch statements may befor thehistoryof cultureand theunderstandingof theman. Insteadwe willtry to show how religious, political, andhistoriographical ideas have shaped the work and are in turn discernible in its form. If I sometimesspeak as if I were describing themindof theauthor, thisismerelyaconventionalwayofreferringtothemesembedded inthe work.^
IV

The study of structure in Herodotus should be conducted, as faras possible,on anobjectivebasis. Criteriaforsuch aninvesti gation have long been available in the observations on archaic styledescribed inChapter II,but theyhave not been used suffi ciently,becauseoutlinesofHerodotushaveoftenbeenmadesimply asaidstothememory,orhave'beenimposedontheauthoraccord ing to preconceived systems alien to Herodotus. The external organization of the Histories differs from later prose by the use made of some peculiar devices, the purpose ofwhich is'the delineation of a skeleton structure for the whole work. The reasons for this procedure becomeplain whenone considers the position Herodotus occupies in the development of Greek prose writing. At a later time, rhetoric furnishes both author and audiencewithformalizedschemesofinternalorganizationwhich, supportedastheyarebystandardizedthoughtandwordpatterns, donot need'tobeiridicatedspecifically,sincetheycanbelearned and recognized byschool doctrine. Inpoetry, theepic hadlong possessed a similar system in its formulae and "themes (siig thesetermsinthesensegiventhembytheschoolofParry)',which werecapable ofalmost unlimiteddevelopment, andwhich made external indications of structure secondary.^^ Drama likewise used underlying patterns, such as certain forms of dialogue, a strictorganizationbyscenesandchoruses,andpatternsassociated
" Cf.theinteresting remarksby H.Frnkelin Gnon^25 (1953)380ff., andH. Chemiss,"The Biographical Fashion in Literary Criticism,"CalCP 12 (1943) 279 92,reprintedinj.P.Sullivan(ed.),CriticalEssays on RemanLiterature: Elegyand Lyric (Cambridge[Mass.]1962) 15ff. 2On theHomeric formula asa structural device,see C.Whitman, Homer and the Heroic rra^tfion,(Cambridge[Mass.] 1958) 115ff. On the'conceptof thetheme, seeA.B. Lord,TheSinger of Tales(Cambridge[Mass.] 1960)68ff.

12

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

INTRODUCTION

13

withtheidea ofchangesof fortune{peripeteia and thelike), allof which were familiar to the audience from constant repetition. When Herodotus constructed thefirst complex prose work in Greek literaturea work rivaling the Iliad in scopehe had to invent asystem that would be intelligible without the help of a stronglydeveloped tradition. For thispurpose heused adeviceofexternalconnectionwhich is found in early prose andis ultimately derived from the epic, though it is used in the latter only in a secondary function.^ Consisting of repeated introductory phrases or sentences at the beginnings ofsections of the narrative, and of summary ones at theends,theseelements(which,forwantofabetterterm,weshall call"framingsentences")providetheworkwitharelativelyclear external structure. Thus they are able to functipn as signposts, marking, so to,speak, thestages of the work's progress. On this foundation, other more complicated patterns could be super imposed withut being marked ip the same explicit manner: theyderiveinpartfromthemotifsfoundinpopularstorytelling,^ early ethnography, Greek wisdom literature, and the moral patternsoftragedy. Becauseoftheuseofframing sentences,these patternsdo not have tosupport thework to thesame extent as inlater^^uthors, butare usedwith greatervariety andfreedom. Previousattemptstoanalyzethestructureoftheworkhavenot, until recently, taken its form entirely seriously. The reason is partly that Herodptus' ideas of ,what constitutes a relevant connection,betweenpartsof thenarrative(betweenstories, orthe events themselves) differ widelyfrom ours. Itis.a mistake, how ever, to distinguish betvyeen real and superficial connections in Herodotus,andto^eclare thatsomearemadeonlyfor"artistic" purposes,while othersaloneare tobe takenseriously.^'Jacoby's wellknown outiine suffers from the fact that only historically
Otherearlyproseworksaredifficultforlistovisualize, butthebooksofPherc cydesofSyrosandtheearlyphilosophersmusthavebeenmuchshorter,andtheworks of Hecataeus presumablyhad asimpleorganization determined bygeography and genealogy,respectively.Thedatesof Xanthusandpharon,andof otherearlyGreek historians,areuncertain;see Gh.I,note59. y Onringcompositionintheepic,seePohlenz,Herodot63;W.A.A.vanOtterlo; DeRingcompositie alsOpbouwprincipe inde epische^Gedichten vanHomerus. Verhand.d. Kon. Nederl.Akad.vanWet., Afd.Letterkunde,nieuweRecks,Deel51,No.l"(1948);Xh.'n, 54ff. Aly,Volksmrchen,passim', Lang", Biogr.Patterns. Ch.II,69. Gf e.g.theconnections oftheArion story,Gh.Ill,86.

relevant connections are stressed.^ Another difficulty'has been therelationofthetotalcontentsofastorytotheelementsstressed intheconnecting phrases.HereHerodotus' methodis topreserve themultiplicityof factorsin each account,while stressingoneor anotherin theouter framing,often not thatwhich most appeals to modern taste. This has led some scholars\o compare his techniquewith that of Boccaccio in the Decamerone,or with that employedin theArabian Nights,and to treatthe connectionsas a mere^frameforthedevelopment ofindividualsfOries.^^ However, the ultimate aim of Herodotus is never the individual story'by itself, but always thestory in relation toothers. Because of.this peculiar balance between theindividual and the generic, many scholarshavegonetotheoppositeextremeofimposinganartificial systemof organizationonthe Histories,using perhapsthedivision intoninebooksasasignofperfecttriadicstructure,orimposingnu mericalschemesonthework, undertheillusion thatharmonious balance is ipso facto meaningful. Thislast assumption vitiates (in the opinion of the present writer) the recent treatment of
28RESuppl.2.283326.Thematerialistheredividedintoamainlineofnarrative, digressions, and digressions within digressions. Cf. also Pagel, Aitiol. Mohent 41ff. AshortoutlineoftheworkwasfoundamongthepapersofA.vonGutschiid;seehis Kleine SchrifUn 4 (1893) 18387. Further, E. Drerup, Das Generationsproblem in der griechischen undgriechischrmischen'KulturAppendix"Die klassischeSchnheit deraltgriechischen Dichtung"14346 (thework dividedinto 15logoi) (Studienzur GeschichteundKulturdesAltertums 18.1);J. Geffken,"EinPrinzipantikerErzh lungsund Darstellungskunst," Hermes%2 (1927) 12ff. B.A.vanGroningen,"Over hetordenend Verband in HerodotusHistorien," Mlanges Huizinga (1948) 4150,is notavailabletome. Fortheidea oRahmenerzhlungin Herodotus,seeAly,Volksmrchen260ff., and index,s.v.;E. Howald,"Ionische Geschichtsschreibung,"Hermes 58(1923) 128ff., and Vom Geist antiker Geschichtsschreibung (Munich 1944) 22ff.; SchmidSthlin 1.2.640,note2;Frnkel,Stileigenheit 87. MostinfluentialhasbeenthetheoryofR.W.MacanthattheworkofHerodotus exhibitsperfect triadicstructure; see Macan,IVVl,l.xiff.^andVlllX,1.1.xvff. Numerical schemes: F.< Pfister, "Der Begriff des Schnen und das Ebenmass, WrzburgerJahrbcher 1 (1946) 349 (cf. Pfister in Philol.Wochenschr. 52 [1932] cols. 1109ff.[=pp.165ff.]). Recently,R.Lattimorehas attemptedtoexplainthemethod ofcompositionfoundinHerodotusbythe mannerofcontemporarybookproduction: see"TheCompositionoftheHistoryofHerodotus,"CP53(1958)9ff. However,asE. Fraenkelhasshown{Aeschylus: Agamemnon3.805), postponementofdetailisastylistic featureofarchaicnarrative;thusitshouldnotbeconnectedwitha mechanicaldetail like bookproduction. Cf. also Egermann, Geschichtswerk 239ff. H.B.Rosn, Eine Laut' undFormenlehre der Herodotischen Sprachform (Heidelberg 1962)"193ff., attempts toshowthattheworkwasputtogetherbya redactoroutofanumberof independent bookrollsleft byHerodotus:hisevidenceisthedistributionofdialectvariantsin the MSS.

14

FORM ANDTHOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

INTRODUCTION

15

theStructure of th.t^Histories by SirJohn Myres,^ who imposes on Herodotus a generalsystem of symmetrical balances such as hehad usedearlierfor Homer.^ Itis true thatin somecases his theoryleads toa numberof acuteobservations, butfor themost part itis.a straitjacket arbitrarilyimposed on thetext,meantto justifyitselfbyitsmereexistence.Thepresentanalysisofthework is closer tothe studies of Pohlenz and Legrand than to that of Myres.^ Theexistenceofframingmembers makesitpossibletoestablish a number of unitsin thework which,for wantof a better term, I have called logoi, following therein the practice of Pohlenz, without being entirely satisfied with the word. Herodotus him selfdoes notuse logosinaformalsense,butratherinthe'meaning of"story"or"argument,"i.e. toindicatecontents.^ For,as we
Myres,Herodotus 79fF.,and Ch.V. I havemade limited use of Myres'obser vations, butIam in basicdisagreementwith hismethodsand theresultingscheme. Myresdistinguisljies between two typesof composition:frieze and pedipient. Thesetermsaremetaphorsfor^l)paratacticcomposition,forwhichseeCh.II,47ff., and (2)circular composition, for which see ibid.,7172. Myres does not take into accountrii^composition,whichshouldnotbeconfusedwithcircularcomposition;see C h . I I , n o t e 2 8 . M y r e s ' w o r k o n H o m e r : J H S 5 2 ( 1 9 3 2 ) 2 6 4 f f . ; 5 5 ^ 4 5 ( 1 9 5 0 ) 2 5 2 f f . ; JHS72 (1952) 1if.;ibid 74(1954) 122ff. Pohlenz, Herodot, passim. Pohlenz was the first to publish a book in which Herodotusisstudied in theformin whichhehas comedown tous, ratherthan asa repositoryofconflictingearlierversions. Legrand,Introduction235ff. (andthroughout theBud edition), was thefirst editor to dividethe workinto unitsother thanthe traditionalandsomewhatunsatisfactorydivisionsaccording tobooks. Cf.Action 21,note 11.Herodotus'oftenuses theplurallogoi torefer toasingle unit of'narrative (e.g. the Libyan logoi 2.16.3, or the Assyrian logoi, 1.184), thus showing that he thinksof such asection asa collection ofstories. Thewellknown reference to theCroesusLogosas ''thefirst of thelogoi" (5.36.4)is areferenceto the story of Croesusrather than to whatwe would call the"CroesusLogos" as'aunit of narrative,for his referenceis toan ajjpendix tothat unit (1.92).In addition to the meaning"story"or"stories," logosalso means"argument,"eitherconcretely (asa sectionof Narrative) orabstractly (asa portion ofreasoning). Inneither case is the word usedfor unitsof narrativein oursense;cf. e.g.1.140.3and 7.137.3("I return totheformersubject");cf.also4.82and5.62.1;2.35.1("!willlengthenmyaccount of Egypt").Herodotus conceived of his work as'aseries of logoi (storiesand argu ments),and notas asingle logos,aswe mustdo becauseof our presuppositionscon cerningthe natureofliteraryworks. Imight addthat, contrarytomanyscholars, Ibelieve;that thefewplaces where Herodotusspeaksofadditionstohisworkare notofanyreal importancefortheunder standingof.its structure.Seetherecent discussionofthetermsirttpevd^Kifanditpoadqnr} byH.Erbse,"TraditionundFormimWerkeHerodots,"Gymnasium68(1961)23957. Erbse interprets these termsas"unnecessary and necessarydigressions, respectively; thisiscorrectasfarastheuseofthewordsgoes,butthe"unnecessarydigressions"are just as germane to the narrative as are others. Consequently, Erbse'sstudy of di gressionsisactually astudyofcertaintypes oflogoi.

haveseen, itis characteristicof hisstylef thathelikes tohide the formal character of his work behind thefiction of informal re porting.Inoutliningtheunits ofthe workwe mustfreeourselves from the notion of subordination, for Herodotus' logoi are of every conceivable length; they are in turn'composed of other logoi,andthereis nospecifichierarchyofmajorandminor units. A logos is thus basically aseries of items, which are thentelyes smaller logoi, held together by certainformal elementssignifying in turn a selection (but never the totality) of unifying themes, beside which other elements are left intact. Thus in^ Herodotus wehave adefinitedistinction betweenouter andinnerstructure, theformereasy todefine, thelatter ofgreat diversity.The result isasystem ofsuperimposedstructures basedon differentkinds of interconnections. It has seemed best, therefore, in analyzing Herodotus' work, to place primary stress upon those intercon nections which can be established as matters of objective fact. Theouthnes provided in this study are thus not mere memory aids, but are based so far as possible on elements indicated by Herodotus himself. Yet a certain amount of freedom must be permittedhere,for Herodotusavoidsstrictformality,even tothe extent ofsometimes letting thereader supply the connectionfor himself. But on the whole,'the outlines are intended to have objectivevalidity. Thus, in Herodotus, literature and history are one and the same, for theform of the work and its insights are mutually dependent. Chapters IV and V, which deal with Herodotus' historical thought, thus describe the consequences which neces sarily derive from the study, in thefirst three chapters, of the structure. Since Herodotus is a classic example of the doctrine that thought appears primarily in organization and structure, the interpretation of his work should always proceed fromsome aspect of organization to the definition of ideas, and not from the opinions of author or critic. It cannot be denied that this method restricts thelimits of interpretation, butit also makes it morecertain.SinceIhaverestrictedmyselftothesimpleraspects ofstructure,ithasalsobeen necessaryto restrictinterpretationto some basic ideas. Fundamentally, Herodotus' cqnception of historyshowsit tobeananalogue(aswell asa part)of nature,or physis,asawhole.Civilizationisnot anaccident,norisitapurely human and conventional creation, as it sometimes appears in

16

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

sophisticthought,butifexistspermanently,likeotherthingsinthe cosmic order. While individual nations understand only the particulars otheir own situations, the historian, in putting to gether theirtraditions,'acquiresa muchlarger consciousness, not limited to the individual units, but comprehending the true permanent natureof historyinitstotality. Herodotus'outlook is thatofauniversalhistorian, though,asweshallseelater,hedeals with a particular historical subject; the totality of his work revealsa universalityin understandinghistory. Thelast chapter combines thestudy ofstructure andof ideas in the analysis of the battles as purely literary.compositions,an approach that needs to bepursued further in the study of the ancienthistorians.In muchancienthistoriography battledescrip tionsformthehighpointoftheauthor'seffort tocharacterizethe forces of history. Battle accountsthus havea muchwider signif icance than merp military history, and are particularly apt to showthe valueof thecombinedstudy offormand thought. Finally the Conclusion considers a number of points insuffi cientlystressedintheprecedingdiscussionsofthework,oromitted, sincetheyare notconnected withthe studyofexternalstructure. Theseare primarilythe wellknownethicaland religiousideasof Hero'dotus and the ethnographic notions of Custom, Equality, and Limit as concepts underlying all history. This brief sketch willplacethe presentinvestigationinalargercontext andwill,it ishoped, encourageothers tocontinueit on a broader basis.

ChapterI THE SUBJECT.OFTHE HISTORIES

' I

Onemajor difficultyconfronting themodern readerof Herod otusisthelackofanexacttitle ofthework.Theword"Histories," althoughancient,is notoriginal withiheauthr,anditwrongly arouses the expectation of a collection of disparate stories. Herodotus himself called his work "the setting forth of his re search," thereby hinting at his method rather than his subject matter. ^ Itisnosurprise,therefore,thatthebookhaslonghadthe reputation of being a mere collection of loosely woven tales. In searching for a title, we areinfact looking for unity of subject matter on the simplest level,for an overall planor pattern, in whateverform. The remainder ,of the proem (1.15) contains, moreover, comparatively few references to the subject. In this respect, it appears to be oldfashioned (so far as we can judge from the fragments of other early prose proenls that survive) and more concernedwiththejustificationoftheauthor'spurpose thanwith thedefinitionofthe contentsof thework. Theproem ofthe His tories may be divided into three principal parts: (1) thefamous longintroductory sentencegiving.the author'sname and ashort description of thecharacter of thework; (2) theaccounts ofthe Persiansand Phoeniciansas reportedby Herodotus,dealingwith the mythical originsof the hostility between Greeks and bar barians;and (3) Herodotus''ownstatementsabout warguilt and the reign of Croesus as the starting point of his work.^ In the introductory sentence,once he has opened the work,Herodotus speaks somewhat vaguely of "human events," then of "great
1Forthis phrase,seeH. Erbse,"Dererste Satzim WerkeHerodots,"Festschri BrunoSnell (1956) 20922.Cf.alsoW.Schmid, Phil.Wochenschr.52 (1932)1001 ff. 2 Ch.IH,8081andnote9;proemial topics:Ch.H,63ff., andthebibliography citcd inCh. HI, note 3. Discussions of prose proems may be found e.g. in M. Pohlenz,JVGG,Ph.hist. Kl.(1920)56ff.,andF.Bizer,UntersuchungenzurArchologiedes Thukydides (Diss.Tiibingen1937) 1ff.

17

18

FORM ANDTHOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

CH. I.THESUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES

19

and marvelous deeds performed by Greeks and barbarians," andfinally he states that Greeks and barbarians "came to war with one another."^ Thereby the definition of the subject is graduallyrestricted toa quarrel (or toquarrels) between Greeks and barbarians, and this idea is further defined in the Persian account (1.1^4)> origihally a series of private disagreements (diaphorai) over raping^ of women, EastWest actions began to take theform ofreal warfare {polemos) at thetimeof theTrojan War. The result was a permanent state of hostihty {echthr) between the'twoparties, who are then identified as Eutopeand Asia. This hostility found expression in repeated acts'of'ietalia tion,and thereader (todayasin antiquity)feels that'thePersian Warswill beanotherstepinthis series. Yet*Herodotusmritions thePersianWars,(thehighpoifitofhiswork)'noWheredirectlyin the proem, and thus the emphasis remainslipoil the idea of a permanent state of>hostility as the'underlying cause for certain futureactions Whichare notyet enumerated. Inthefinal sectionof the proem (1.5.34), Herodotusgives us thebeginningoftheseriesof"unjustacts"inthehistoricalperiod, namelythe attacksby CroesusofLydia uponthe Greeks,and he then announces that h will proceed with his narrative. Again, inwhaidirectionhewillgo,hedoes "notsay,butweexpectfurther aggressioni, here again the Persian Wars are imphed without being mentioned. Thus the proem of the work foreshadows a specific'subject matterwithout namingit.In thisrespect Herod
' SeErgon 263if. *The reader, coming upon the word cwoAe/iijaav in the proem, is naturally inclined totranslat "theyfought"aridfinds herea reference to'thePersian Wars. However,'tJieaorist maybeingressive,"theycame tofight" (thisis notuncommon inHerodotus),.and^ayrfeptoall warsbetween.Greeksand.barbarians.Thatthis interpretation is the correct oneis shown by the term Sicz<j>op^ ("quarrel") in the following sentence, which takes upifoA/nij<ra','nd furthe by 1.4.4 (the Persians alwaysconsidered the Greeks their"enemies),1.5.1 (theb^inningof thehostility), and1.5.3 (hebegan withunjt^st deeds,^in theplural).Themost precisereference to warsbetwepnGreeksandPersiansaftertheintroductorysentenceis1.4.1;(thebreeks) nporpvs yp Spiai orpctTe^eaai s Tv''Aalriv ^ a<f>4a ey Evpwir^v, biit that jvould includesuch campaignsa3.Dari,us' Scythian'war.Thus theproem definesa stateofhostility ratherthan namingthePersian Warsdirectly. Cf.Pohlenz, Herodot IO. DespitethephrasemXcfiov Ua^tipewin 1.25.1'and74.2, Simfifpdv, and Sta^pos almost always refer to private grievances causing aquarrel,i.e.tostatesofmind.(SeePo\yelI,Lexicon s.w. Characteristically,Herodotusj while rejecting the biasof thePersian account, accepts its'tinderlying principles, andso thestory comes tocontain several themes fundamentalto thewholework.

otus dififers substantially from Homer, who in the proems of both the Iliad and the Odyssey announces at least the central characterandthe earUer portionsof thepoem, althoughhedoes not give theend: theepic poet need notjustify his workas does theprosewriter,since its"truth"'isguaranteedbytheMuse,i.e. tradition,and henceheisfree tobe morespecific.InHerodotus, we realize only that the work isnot designed,as.af universal history,but asanaccount ofspecificinteractionsbetween Greeks and Asiatics.However, thereader mustidentify theseafctigns for himself,aswellasconjecturewhere theworkwillcometoan.end. Thereis afurther difficulty:if'we apply theidea.of ahostihty betweenEastandWesttothewholework(as'Pohlenzhasattemp ted todo),wefind thatthereare agood manyeventsthat donot fit the formula. Among such events.arecertain Eastern warsin whichthe Greeksdo notparticipate atall;further,someEastern attacks on nonGreek Europeans, e.g. the Scythians; and many shorterstories.Theconflict betweenEast andWest mentionedin the proemcannot, therefore, beconsidered as therealsubject'of the Histories, as Pohlenz thought.At thesame time,itisequally impossible to define the subject as a history of the East,since the work ends abruptly with the Persian Wars and omits a numberof precedingEastern events.'Oneof Pohlenz'critics has suggested,asthesubjectofthework,"TheRisq^and'FallofAsiatic Power";but thisfails toactountfor thelarge amount of Greek materialandanyhowisnot evenmentionedin the^proem.Unless we wish to follow those who would,deny altogether any real consistencyofsubject matter,wearefaced withachoice between "East'West conflict" and "account of Asiatic powers" and yet neitheroftheseseems toincludethe wholeo,theextentwork.^ Inthisdilemma,itmaybeofadvantagetoabandontheproem for'a moment and tolook at the whole work as Herodotus has constructedit,.namelyas aseries of historicalaccounts followihg oneanother ina singlesequence. Theseaccounts, orlogoi, arin largemeasureidentifiablebyrecurringintroductoryandsummary statements,andsometimes byanecdotes, notes,orother material
'Below,42. .. vj p Previousopinionson the'subjectof theworkvaryconsiderably: seeEgennann, Geschichtsberk,Jacoby, RE Suppl. 2.347ff.; Pohlenz. 1 Legrand W duction22735; Myres,Herodotus 60ff. Cf.Sieveking, Herodot111; M.B.Sakllanou, "Motive und Zielsetzung des Herodoteischen Geschichtswerkes, Prakt. Acad, of Athens15 (1940)13139.

20

FORM AND THOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

CH.I. THE SUBJECTOF THE HISTORIES

21

placedin thebreaks between.Thuswe haveobjectivemeansfor distin^ishingthepartsoftheworkandfordiscoveringtheoverall organization of the Histories,if such exists.The plan of thework mayinturnelucidate theproblem ofitssubject. The"sequenceoflogoi andtheir connectionsshowthatthework consistsprincipallyofaseriesofmilitaryactionsbeginning,bythe traditional dating, around 560 B.C. with Croesus, and con tinuing, with some wellmarked interruptions, to the batde of Salamisin 480 B.C. and beyond, to theend ofthe PersianWars in 479. Withfew exceptions,theconnection between the logoi before Salamisis through the Oriental, rather than the Greek, lineofction.Herodotusthus follows,inthemain.Easterninitia tive,although thisdoes not necessarilyimply thatheiswriting a historyoftheEast,forhisEasternaccountisnotalwayscomplete, and its be^nningand end are arbitraryif seen merelyfrom an Easternpoint ofview. TheworkbeginswithCroesusattheheightofhispower(1.6.1). Two statements are made about him: (1) he ruled the nadons west of theHalysriver, and (2) he was thefirst to conquer the Greeksof Asia Minor. Thesestatements arerelated to the two themeswhichweconsideredbefore:thePoweroftheEast, andthe EastWestConflict.Itisimportanttorealizethatintheaccountof Croesus (forthe momentIomitthe proem) theEastWesttheme ismentionedinthesecondplaceonly,i.e.ithastheinnerposition bothatthebeginningandat theendoftheCroesus Logos.^"^Thus theideaofthe growth'ofAsiaticpower isclearly moreimportant than thatof the Eastern contacts with the Greeks, so far as the connection of this logos with the subsequent narrative is con cerned.The sameis trueinternally: Herodotus tells us much of the accession of Gyges as thefirst king of the Mermnadae; the climaxof the Croesus Logosis Croesus'illfated attackon Cyrus, whereby the power of Lydiawasadded to thatof Persia."By a
Ch.11,61. Below,40. Sec,morefully,Causation254ff. Thatis tosay, themotif ofEastern power and thatof theEastWest conflict frametheCroesusIj)gosatthebeginningandendinthe orderAB... BA.Mention of theGreeksreciasonlyonceattheendof theCroesus Logos (1.92.1),yhileekewhere theGreekmotif isdropped,andonly theouterconnectionwithCyiiis' campaignsis established (1.94.7and 1.130.1= 141.1).Secakonote83. Themainsectionsof theCroesus Logosall dealwith Easternhistory,ifwetake theSolonstoryasawarningofCroesus'downfall.

series of cross references, Herodotus then connects Croesus' defeat byCyruswith thelatter'sfurtherconquests, whichleadto completePersiancontrolofAsia.^^HereHerodotus'thoughtmust runsomethinglike this:Lydia had unified Western Asia Minor; throughCroesus'defeat thispart ofAsia becamea partof Persia, which thusacquired totalcontrol. TheoriginofPersia,aswellastheprevioushistoryoftheMedes and the accession of Cyrus, arc told by Herodotus in a section clearlymarkedasaninterruptionofthedirectlinewhichconnects Croesus' defeat to the subsequentcampaigns of Cyrus (1.95.1). At the end ofhis account of Cyrus' accession, Herodotus tells us that he is returning to "the previous account" (1.130.3 and 1.140.3,interrupted'bythesectiononthecustomsofthePersians). This"previousaccount"istheoverthrowof Croesusby Cyrus. AfterthestoryofCyrus'conquestofLydia, theworkpresents a straight line of Persian action. Gyrus settles the affairs of Lydia and then proceeds eastward to complete the conquest of Asia (1.153.34). Meanwhile, the campaign against the lonians is conducted by Cyrus'generals Mazaresand Harpagus (1.156AT.). At theend of thisaccount, wereturn toCyrus, whois subduing "UpperAsia"(1.177).Thenfollowthetwocampaignsagainstthe Assyrians (i.e.theBabylonians) andthe ilassagetae;inthelatter Cyrusloses hislife. Cambyses, theson and legitimatesuccessor of Gyrus, at once attacks the Egyptians, whom his father had planned toconquer (cf. 1.153.4).^ After the accont of Cambyses' victory at the Pelusian branchof the Nile, wefollow thatof hisstayin Egypt, first in Memphis and then inSais. Heplans campaigns against theCarthaginians,theAmmonians,andthelonglivedEthiopians, buthefails toconqueranyof them.From Ethiopiahereturns to Thebes, and then to Memphis, where he becomes insane. The account of Cambyses' madness forms a coda to thestory of his campaigns,andis thusthend ofthe Cambyseslogoi (2.13.38). At this point there "occurs a minor break in the work,for Herodotustells aboutaSpartanwar againstPolycratesof Samos before he tiirns to the Revolt of the Magiand theaccession of Dariusto thethroneof Persia (3.3960).Theintercalationofthis
" Above,note 12,andCh. III,89. Inthis surveyofstructure,Iomittheethnographiclogoi(includingthe Egyptian). Ontheirposition,see below,34.

22

FORM'ANDTHOUGHT IN HERDOTUS'

GH. I.THE SUBJECT OF THE HISTORIES

23

logosguaranteesthecorrectnessof makinga majordivisionat this

point, before the death of Cambyses.'Thatstory, in turn, intro ducestheRevolt oftheMedian Magi,whichis closelytiedto the Accession of Darius (3.6187). Here again, Herodotus' main concerniswiththepowersituationinAsia,whichisfirstweakened by the revolt and then reestablished by Darius. Now Darius is thekingwhorepresentsthehighpointofPersianmight;Herodotus describes that power in the account of Darius' marriages, his divisionof theempire intosatrapies,and therevenueshe derives fromthem.Actionisheresuspended;beforereturningtothemain s t o r y , H e r o d o t u s a d d s a n a c c o u n t o f t h e E n d s o f t h e W o r l d , a n d in aseries offive anecdotesheskillfullyestablishesalinkbetween theaccession storiesandthoseofDarius'subsequentcampaigns.^' TheConquest ofSamos by thePersians under Dariusinitiates alongseqvienceofPersian campaignsendingwith Marathonand intimately connected with Xerxes' campaigns against Greece. Therefore Herodotus calls Samos thefirst of all Greek and bar barian cities conquered by Darius (3.139.1).^ Therefollow the Babylonian and Scythian campaigns, and it is with'the latrer that the narrativeassumes greater compactness. Not only is the Scythiancampaign treated ingreater detail than the preceding, but at its conclusion Herodotus establishes a number of precise connectionswiththeIonianRevolt,whichinturnisthebeginning ofinteractionsBetweenEastandWest,andthusleadsto thePersian Wars.These connectionsconsistfirst of theaccounts oftheEuro peancampaignsofMegabazusandOtanes,wheretheerhphasislies upon the Hellespontthe boundary of Asia and Europe later crossed by Xerxes. They also comprise thestoryof Histiaeusof Miletus,the transferof thePaeonians toAsia, andthe movement of Darius himself tohis capital,Susa, from which heis to direct allsubsequent campaigns against the Greeks.This connection is so strongthat thecontemporary Libyan,campaignis treated as anaside. Itisoften assumed that theGraecoPersian narrative startswith theIonian Revolt, but thelinksreferredtoprovethat theearher'Scythian campaign is the reaLbeginningof thisseries ofevents.Thereason,aswill beseenlater,istheparallelbetween
Forthe sectionon the"EndsoftheWorld,"seeCh.III,102103,andIV,72. " Ch.III,103104;SamianStories 314f. Fortheinterpretationofihi sentence,seePohlenz, Herodot 77,note3. Ch.III,111;Causation26970; Tatund Geschichte508, note18.

Scythians and Greeks as defenders of the freedom of Europe againstAsiatic expansion.^ The Ionian Revolt ends with Persian naval action near the Hellespont (6.33 and 42). The next action of Darius' generals begins with Mardonius' crossing of the Hellespont toattack the mainland Greeks and punish the Athenians and Eretrians for theirparticipation intheIonianRevolt(6.43ff.).Thisexpedition faresbadly atMt.Athos andreturns toAsia withoutaccomplish ingitsmission.DariusnextorderstheThasianstotakedowntheir walls, andhe sendsheralds.toall theGreeksaskingfor earthand waterastokensofsubmission.Simultaneously,heordersnewprep arations for an attack on Greece; these result'in the campaign against Athensand Eretria,which failsat Marathon.^^ Thereissomedififerenceofopinionamongscholarsconcerning the exact place at which to make the break between the cam paigns of Darius and the later campaigns of Xerxes. Itseems tome thatthemost naturaldivisionoccursin thefirst chapterof Book 7,where wereturn toan earher pointof thenarrativeand seeDarius receivea messageabout thedefeatat Marathon. He is now anxious to campaign in person against>the Greeks, and upon hearingof the outbreakof a revolt inEgypt, hewishes t attack bothcountries, but'death prevents the execution of these plans (7.4).Thus both campaignsfall toXerxes ashis heiri The deathofDarius does notconstitute abreak inthe narrative,and thePersian Warsof48Q B.C.areseenby Herodotusas thedirect resultof Darius'last plans. Xerxes' campaign against Greece (his Egyptian can^paign is not described indetail by Herodotus) is a closelyknit narrative in which, after describing the decision and plans of Xerxes, Herodotus follows exactly the movements of the army and navy, beginning in Asia Minor and continuing across the Hellespont into Greece, until wefind the army on the road to Athens and the navy anchored in her harbor. It is with the
20Ch. III,106F. 81Hdt. 6.46ff.(Thasos),48.1ff. (heralds),48.2.(firstpreparations>forMarathon), 94ff. (Marathon). "Jacoby,RESuppl.2.311and 314,divides after 7.4 (deathof Darius), but the majoritydivideat7.1 : seeHowandWelb2.124;Macan,VIIIX1.1.xixff.; Pohlenz, Herodot120; Myres,Herodotus 105ff.= 217 (cf.126); Legrand,Bud. ThebreakconsistsprimarilyinthegroupofstoriesattheendofBook6,especi allyChs.12531 and13740.Cf. Ch.III,125,andnote142. 84Hdt.8.34(army) and66.1(navy).

24

CH.I.THE SUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES FORM ANDTHOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

25

antecedentsofthebattleofSalamisthat thestructureofthework changes (8.42if.) Fromhere on,with someinterruptions during thecampaignofMardoniusin479B.G.,'thenarrativefollowsthe actionsof theGreeks, whowill be thevictorsin thewar.^s Thus the major partof Herodotus'work presentsa connected series of Persian'actions beginning with Cyrus' campaigns after theoverthrow.ofCroesus(1.141ff.)andendingjustbeforeSalamis. Thischainisclearlymarkedthroughout byintroductoryandsum mary statements whichit has not been convenient to quote in detail. ThegreatmajorityoftheselogoibeginwithPersianaction, ifwe exceptsmaller logoiwhich areplacedin thebreaks between major units.^' Three major logoi, however, also differ from the norm by beginning with Greek action, thus foreshadowing the aboutfaceof thenarrativeatSalamis.Theseare thefirst Persian conquestofIonia(1.141 ff.),theSpartancampaignagainstPolyc ratesofSamos (3.3960),and the Ionian Revolt (5.28 ff.).With these exceptions, Persian action determines the course of the narrativein theHistories. Thisarrangement is disturbed, however,at the beginningand theend.Thecampaignof Croesusagainst Cyrusshouldproperly have formed a part of the campaigns of Cyrus," but taking into considerationno doubtthefactthatCroesus washere theaggres sor, Herodotus has placed the history of Lydia at the beginning ofhis work.2 Attheend hehas cutoff thelineof Persian action
'5TheGreeklineofactionafterSalamis consistsprimarilyof theadvanceof the Greeknavy:8.108ff.(siegeofAndros),8.131f.(movement toDelos),9.90ff.(move ment to Samos and Mycale),^9.114ff. (movement to Hellespont and capture of Sestus),9.121 (returnto mainlandGreece).Inaddition, thecampaignofMardonius showsthat theGreekshavetheinitiativetoanextent;seeCh.VI,289.Thereturnof Xerxesandthestories concerned wjthArtabazus (Ch.VI,285,297)aresecondary. Seefurther.Ch. III,14041. E.g.Hdt.1.177 (Cyrusconquersupper Asiawhile hisgeneralssubdueIonia); 2.1 and 3.1 (CambysesAgainst Egypt); 3.61.1 (Revolt,of Magisynchronized with Cambyses'stayin Egypt);3.139.1(Darius'first campaign directedagainst Samos); 4.1 (Scythiancampaign chronologicallyrelated toBabylonian); 3.143.1 (Darius,on returnfrom Scythia, begins European'campaign) ;5.28(Relation of Ionian Revolt to European campaign); 6.43.1 (Mt.Athos campaign); 6.46.1 (Thasians); 6.48.1 (heraldssent to Greece);6.94 (Marathon). 7.1establishes theconnection between Darius'andXerxes' campaigns:above,notes22 and23. " E.g.certainethnographicsectionsattheendofthe campaignsofCyrusagainst theFabyloniansandMassagetae(1.192200and1)21516),orthefirstMiltiadesLogoj (6.3441). "G. DeSanctis,F/C54(1926)289ff.,and64(1936)1ff.,first proposedthewell known theory that this"displacement" indicated ashift in plan, but weare here concernedonly withthework initsfinal form.

by the victories of the Greeks. We may say then, provisionally, that the beginningand end of the work aredetermined by con siderations other than the rise andfall of the East. We shallsee laterwhat theseconsiderations are.
II

Apartfrbm thebeginning and end of thework, itis clear that the main sequence of logoi is not primarily an account of East Westconflicts,butadescriptionoftheactivitiesofEasternpowers, amongwhichtheir warswiththeGreeks areonlya part.Already the Lydian and Median kings exhibited what, to HeVodotus, is the essentially Asiatic characteristic of basically unniotivated expansionism. By overthrowing both nations, the Persians established a unified Asiaticempire which combined theregions east and west of the Halys river. Cyrus and Darius, the two greatestPersiankings, attempted,withvaryingdegreesofsucc'ess, tocontinue this expansion,nd Cambysesand Xerxes took their plans f empire directly from their fathers.^^ For much of^tHe Historiestheunityofthenarrative isbasedonunityofactiondriven forward bya singlebasic motivation. This view runs counter to the commonly expressed argument that at least a portion of theWork isa historyof Persia.Jacoby implies that the .elements of'such a history would consist of chronicles of kings and their deeds.More i:ecently, J. E. Powell has outKned his proposed original form of Hrodotus' PersianHistory :ittooformsastraightforwardchroniclebeginning with the Assytians (1.95.'2) and continuing with Median and Persian history, with the Lydian history following upon Cyrus' accession. Powell thinks that this history origihally extended as far as the,Libyan Campaign (4.205) andwas actually pubhshed separately. Latr Herodotusconceived theplan ofextending the
Causation253ff. u c i. Throughoutthehistories ofCroesusand Cyrus,Herodotusemphasizesfirst the division,andthentheunificationofAsia.SeePohlenz,Herodot21ff.;Causation25859, andnote31. ^ r . " Cyrus,who"cametoruleover allofAsia" (1.130.3),finds hislimit,before he canconquerEgypt,in thecampaignagainsttheMassagetae.Darius,edgedonby his wifeatthebeginningof hisrule(3.134),finds hislimitinprematuredeathbeforethe conquest of Egypt and Greece (7.4). Cambyses conquers Egypt, nd Xerxes re conquersit,accordingtothewishesoftheirfathers.Xerxes'secondtask theconquest ofGreeceendsinfailure. *8Jacoby,RESuppl.2.348ff.

26

FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTS

CH.I. THE SUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES

27

workintothefifth centuryandbegantorewriteit,buteventually he used both versionsfor the antecedents of his History of the PersianWars.Jacobyan Powelldiffer oilyincertain details: Jacoby's Persian Historyextends through Book6, while Powell's first draftstopsinBook 4.These theoriesare based on theobser vation that Herodotus did infact conceiveof Eastern history in the, (no doubt traditional) pattern of kings' chronicles, as is apparent from the formulaic language he juses for royal succes sion.^ Tliey neglect, however, the considerable freedom with whichHerodotus handleschromcle data. The history of the Egyptian kings may serve as an example (2.99182).Itsfirstsection(2.99146) beginswiththementionofa list of 331 kings which Herodotus claims to have received from the Egyptian priests. This list is not reproduced in the work, however, and Herodotusconfines himselfto the"first andthelast kings'(MinandMoeris),andtooneotherperson(QueenN^tocris), whose exact place in the series is not given. This selection is determinednotonly bythepaucity ofsourcesavailable,but also byHerodptus'desire tomark thebeginningandend oftheseries, as well as by characteristic Herodotean ideas of historical rele vance:_Nitocrishad builtgreat builings,hercruelvengeanceon themurderer ofher brother was to becounted as. a great deed, and theparadoxofawomanrulingovermen paralleledthestory ofhernamesake, thequeenofBabylon.Thefirst listisfollowed, withouta break,by anotherof ten kingsfiomSesostris toSetho, whichisgivenin completeand consecutiveform,except thatthe lengthsofthekings reignsarementionedonlywherethenumbers havea specialsymbolicv^lue;these kingswere eitherexception aUygreatorexceptionallywicked. 7Bycontrast,the.historyo^.the
" Powell,Hist. Herodotus 24,60,and 63ff.Powell ismuch influenced byJacoby (above,note32) andDeSanctis(alxive, note28). " formulais:Aftersuch andsuchan event,king Xdied,havingrulcdn yeara, and king T acquired the rule; see e.g. 1.25.1 and 26.1; 1.214.3and 2.1.1; 3.10.2;7.4.Since thedatingofotherfifthcentury historiansisuncertain, wedonot knowm whatform Herodotusknew tBischronicle pattern;see below, note59.But seeJacoby,Abhandlungenz.griech.Gesiichtsschr.(Leiden1956) 198200. " WheAerornotHerodotusactuallyhadsuchacompletelist,bemaintainsthat hedid,'and thumeans atleast thathe assumed thepriests could have procured it lor.him. "Hdt."2.I00. " Cheops ruled for 50 years, his brother Chcphren for 56, and these 106 years toge^erbroughtgreat evil toEgypt (2.128).WhUe thefour predecessorsof Cheops hadbeena boonforEgypt,thefollowingthreekingsruined her(2.124.1andff.),for

later Saite dynasty (2.14782) is 'complete in all respects: Herodotus' sources (being, ashe gives us to understand, partly Greek) were here more accurate, and he reproduces them more exactly,inthemannerofachronicle.Herodotusappears tohave adapted his material to a theory about the history of Egypt, accordingtowhichitfellintofourperiods:(1) alegendaryperiod of 331' kings who were of little importance, (2) the great and prosperous rules of Sesostris, Pheron, Proteus, and Rhamp sinitus, (3) a period of decline under the remainder of the ten kings (thePyramid Builders),and (4) theSaite revival. The king lists of Lydia and Media are treated even more summarily by Herodotus. The Lydian emphasizes mainly the campaignsagainstGreeks.ThewarofAlyattes withthe Medesis transferred to a different part of the narrative, and there are a number of other irregularities, mostly affecting purely Oriental events. The Median history stresses the overall expansionist
thegodshaddecreedaltogether150yearsofmisfortuneforEgypt(2.133.3).HoWever, the third of th bad kings, Mycerinus (successor of Chephren and son of Cheops), upset the gods' calculfitions by bringti^Egypt relief from her troublesbefore the appointed time. For this he was punished by having his reign shortened (2.133). SinceHerodotxis docs not give the totaMength,it isnot clear howlong altogether thethreebad kingsruled,except thatitwasless than150 years,andthatMycerinus' reigr^^asted*47 years, this beingconsiderablyless thap44years,sinceMycerinus^ complainedthathewas todiesoyoung (2.133.2).Ishouldadd thatIcannotaccept thetransposition(byB.Apostolidesand SirFlindersPetrie)of2.124,line25(Hude) 2.136 tostand between 2.99 and 2.100, since that destroys the contrast between evvoiiUtand KOKTTI in2.124(beginning), aproblemnotsolvedby therecentdefense ofthe transpositionby H.T.Wallinga,Mnemo^,ser.4, 12 (1959) 20423.Cf.also vonFntz, TAPA67 (1936) 331,note 15.Clearly wearedealing herewith awhole webof symbolicnumbera (50;"56'=50+ 2x3;4+3 =7;3x50;x+7).The passage is notproperly,treated byJ.W.S.Blom, Dttypische Gelallen bij Hornerosen Herodotus (Nijmegen1936). W.H.Roscher,Die Z<^150in Mythus,Kultus,etc.,ASAW 33,No. 5(Leipzig 1917),is notavailabletome. Evik areconnected with numbersin thestoryof theEthiopianSabacos, whose ruleinEgyptlasted50yean,againadivinelyordainedtime(2.139.13).By contrast, the totalgiven for the341 Egyptian kingsis anarbitrary calculation byHerodotus himself on the basis of his belief that three rules would last 100 years (2.142.2); diflferentiyF.Wv Mitchel,Phoenix 10(1956) 6263. War of Alyattes with Cyaxarcs: 1.16.2=74=103.2.Other irregularita; the notorious phrase1orosin1.14.4compares Gygeswith hissuccessors, nothis pre decessors;cf.Steinadloc.andPohlenz,Herodot 10,note I.Further,Sadyattes'reignis treatedpartlyunder hbson's(1.18.2).TheMilesianwarof Alyattesis toldafter the mentionofhisothercampaigns(whichcouldnothaveprecededit)toachievea climax at the end of his life (1.16.2 fF.; see below, note81). Likewise, theseparation of Croesus' Greek campaigns from those against native populations (1.2627:1, and 1.28)is notnecessarily chronological.

28

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH.I.THE SUBJECTOF THE HISTORIES

29

policy of the kings ratherthan their individual reigns. Ineach case thehistoryis treated ina mannersuitable to theparticular place it occupies in the work as we now read it. Furthermore, both the Egyptian and Median chronicles arecut at theend to connect them with the subsequent narratives: mention of the deathofAmasisisshifted toCambyses'attack onEgypt (3.10.2), and the reign of Astyages is not given in detail except for his relations with Cyrus. We should then be careful to avoid over emphasizing the significance of the elements of chronicle form. InthePersianhistory,thedeathofCyrus markstheendofalogos, sincehediedinaction,namelyinthecampaignagainsttheMassa getae (1.214.3). Cambyses' death, on theother hand, is toldin connectionwiththe RevoltoftheMagi(3.66.2),and thedeathof Darius is a part of the section which introduces the campaigns of Xerxes (7.4). Thisalonesuggests that the Persian chronicleis for Herodotusmerely areceived traditionalpattern, and notthe mainbasis ofhis work. Furthermore,itcan beshown that Herodotus doesnot always givear completeand evenly balanced account ofall the'evfentsin a king's reign which are known tohim. Incertain instances, he himself tellsus thathe has beenselective. Elsewhere,he casually mentionsimportantelementsof aking'shistory whichhe hasnot seenfit toificludein theirproper place.Contrary toacommonly held view, Herodotus did not uncriticallyinclude every piece of information thathad come tohis attention.^ Ondoseanalysis, one' isstruckby hisselectivitynlorethanbyhisinclusiveness.This selectivity'furnishes several clues to the unity of the subject of thework. IntheCroesusstory,twoitemsthatwouldhavebeenimprtant in a Lydian history areneglected by Herodotus :oneis Croesus'
" Pohlenz,Herodot 23f. Itisacommon,butquiteerroneous,assumptionthatHerodotusisalUinclusive, afeelingexpressedin Rawlinson's mistranslationofthefamousphraseiyw ^ctAcu XyivTO X e y o f i f v a , e t c . ( 7 . 1 5 2 . 3 ) : " m y d u t y i s t o r e p o r t a l l t h a t i s s a i d ' . . w h e r e "all"isaddedgratuitously.Herodotusmeans thathemust.tellastory'(oncehetells it atall) asit is told,regardless ofwhether hebelieves it.jacoby,REsuppl. 2.350, line 67, assumes that Herodotus tells all he knows about Greek history, which is manifestlynot thecase.EveiiPohlenz,Herodot 43ff., assumesthatthe workcontains moreinvestigation {histori) than thelogos requires. In making thesejudgments, we are^idedby modemnotions ofrelevance, not byHerodotus' own.Cf. alsoIntro duction,note 34(on"digressions"). G.Gottlieb,Das Verhltnisderausserherodoteischen berlieferung zu Herodot (Bonn 1963) 130ff., statesthat Herodotus is veryselective beforethe PersianWars,andfor thelatterperiodsomewhatselectivealso.

struggle to gain possession of the throne, the other, theseries of hisearlyconquestsin Asia Minor.Inanappendix totheCroesus Logos (1.92.24), Herodotus tells of certain dedicatory offerings, made by Croesus soon after his accession, which must be dis tinguished from the dedications made later in connection with hisgreat war againstCyrus.Thseearlierdedications,Herodotus thought, derivedfrom the patrimonyof aman whohad tried to help a halfbrother of Croesus in seeking'the throne.^^ Nothing of all this is mentioned in the description of Croesus' accession earlier in the Histories (1.26.1flP.),sincethere theemphasis is on Croesus'greatpowerfromthebeginningofhisreign.Thisevalua tion isactually a Herodotean,or'atleasta Greek,invention,for it has been shown that Croesus' father Alyattes Was the more powerfulking, andGyges, thefounderof thedynasty,was prob ably also a greater conqueror than he appears in Herodotus' account.^^InviewoftheHerodoteanconceptionofCroesus,itisall the more remarkable that his nonGreek conquests in Asi Minor are condensed, at the cost of some inconsistency, into a singlesentence,whichconnectshis GreekcampaignswithSolons visit toSardis (1.2829).*Herodotus stresses primarilythe result
In1.92, Herodotuslists allthe dedications made by Croesus, except thoseat Delphiand thesanctuaryof Amphiarausjust'beforethewar withCyrus (thesehad been mentioned earlier).He.then declares that theseother dedicationswere made from the patrimony ofa supporter (unnamed) of Croesus' halfbrother Pantaleon, i.e.theywere maderightafterCroesus'accession(1.92.4).Herodotus isherecompleting apatternstressed forall theLydian kings,according towhich theaccountsoftheir reigns couistof campaignsand dedications,since both aregreat accomplishments {erga),cf."e.g. 1.14 (Gyges). Nevertheless, the appendgives us de facto'a.piece of Croesus'earliest history,and onewhich would haveconflicted withthe description of Cro'esus' greatpower at thebeginnmg of thework (1.6ff.). Theidea that these dedications wereearly is doubtless derived from the Pantaleon story. Nicolaus of Damascus has, perhaps from Xanthus, a different version of thesame story; he names thesupporter Sadyattesand gives a private motivation for Croesus hatred (fr.65; Jacoby 11,A36061andII,C25051).See, ingnral,Weissbach, Suppl.5,s.v.Kroisos. For Alyattessee E.Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums*,ed. H.E. Stier,3 (1937) 166and note1. Cf.G.Radet, La Lydie et lemonde grec autemps des Memnadts(Paris 1893)193ff. ForGyges,seeRadet,op.cit.,Ch.V;K.J. Beloch,GriechischeGeschichte* 1.1 (1912) 34346;D. G.Hgarth inCAH 3(1929) 50124; LehmannHaupt, RE, s.v.Gyges,1957ff. j / Ibelievethatthetextof1.28issound,exceptthatwe shouldreadwpoocKnj/icww instead of irpoa7nKT<ttivov. (Krger had already suggested irpoatuttcnaiivov.) The accountissocondensedhereattheimpressioniscreatedthatCroesuswasthefirst to reachtheHalysriver;yetHerodotusknewthat Alyatteshadfought theMedes,and thusmusthavebeentheirneighbor (cf.Steinon1.29,line2);contrastalso7.30with 1.74(butnotethatHerodotusdoesnotspeakoftheHalysasboundaryinthetimeof

30

FORM AND THOUGHT INHERODOTUS

CH. I.THE SUBJECT OPlTHE HISTORIES

31

of these conquests, namely that Croesus^Jiad subdued nearly all nationswest ofvthe Halysriver. r Inthe logosdealing withCyrus, Herodotushimself tellsus that heisusingonly .partoftheavailablematerial.ThestoryofCyrus' birthisonlyone outoffour versions known tohim (1.95.1),and for ^the Account of Cyrus' death a similar statement is made (1.214.5).^^ As wehave seen, the birth and accession of Cyrus are told in di^ogosseparatefrom thelogoi of Cyrus' campaigns,a treatment which has caused some obscurities in the narrative, especiallyiat the beginning and end ofthe accession logos,where the locale of the action is not always clear.* This isolates the logos of Cyrus' origin from his campaign logoi, a^ijvell.asfrom the earlier war of Croesusj in both of which the loqale (Sardis) isclearlynamed. ThecampaignsofCyrus,inturn,showevident tracesof condensation.Theyfallinto twosections:thefirst dezds withthe Ionian campaign,in'which we get only a ghmpse of Cyrusat Ecbatana,without anydetailsofhis Easterncampaigns (1.153.4). The second partis introduced by the statement that most of the nations conquered will beomitted, except for what is most worthy of account (1.177.1). The two campaignswhich qualify from this point of view are the Babylonian and Mas sagetan. Babylon is evidently of great interest to Herodotus,for he tells later on thestory'of its second conquest by Darius and
Alyattes).Theseapparentinconsistencies could beadjusted, butHerodotusdoes not face the problem. For a suggested adjustment, see Weissbach, RE Suppl. 5.459. Similarly,the apparentconflict between thestatement ^atCroesus wasthefirst to subdue theGreeks andthestories ofearlier Mermnadwars againstGreek citieshas caused muchperplexity (see, hovvever, Pohlenz,Herodot ip11 :thedifferenceisone between raids and real conquest). Lik^the brevity with which Herodotus tells of Croesus'foreignalliancesother thantheSpartan (1.77.13and82.1),theseomissions betrayHerodotus'purposes.;first hisintentiontodepict^Croesus^asthe greatestofthe Mermnad line,and secondlyhis emphasison Easternrelations withthe Greeks.Cf. alsoabove, note38. **For theGreek versionsof Cyrus' birthand death,sec Weissbach, RESuppl. 4,s.v.Kyrosjvfo.6,1129 ff. Theaction takes place'throughout nearEcbatana, which is, however,named only once (1.110.2).The homeof Cyrusis simplycalled "Persia"(1.108.2; 123.3; 123.4;126.1):on thistermsee below, note51.At theend, thecaptureof Eqbatana isonlyvaguelyhintedat(1.128.2),althoughthisisstresseditvthecuneiform Jradition: seeOlmstead, Hist.Pers.37. IntheCroesus Logos,itisnotstatedwhere Cyruscame fromwhen heattackedCroesiis (1.76.2). TheCroesus Logosends with CyrusinSardis, andthe.campaign logoi beginin the same locale (1.141.1), whence we follow Cyrus' travels into "Upper Asia" (1,153.3,etc.). ,

promisesafuller treatmentofitshistory (inthesocalledAssyrian

logoi, which were probably neverwritten). The reason for this

fullnessbecomesclearwhenwereadoftheimportanceofBabylon for the resources of the Persian empire.*' The city represents symbolically the center of power in Asia,'and,its conquest by CyrusstandsforPersian conquestof allAsia.Similarly, thecam paignagainst'the^Massagetae hasa symbolicimportance,sinceit illustratesthe downfallofaruler:on thiscampaign, Cyruscame to the limit of his^aggressive military plkns, and lst his life in defeat.* Cyrus' campaigns are'thus treated on three levels: the majority of his Eastern campaigns are barely mentioned, the Babylonian and Massagetan campaigns are stressed because of their symbolic importance, and only the Greek campaign is giveninfulldetail. ThestoryofCambysesshowsonlytwoinconsistenciesduetothe adaptationofreceivedtradition.Oneis thecuriosremarkin'the description of Darius' empire (3.88.1) that the people of Asia had been conquered for Darius by Cyrus, " and then again by Cambyses." Since Herodotus, as is probable, did not coisider Egypt s part of Asia, we should not refer this statement to Cambyses' Egyptiancampaign, butto troubleswhich aroseafter his accession and whichHerodotus does'not mention elsewhere, since he wished to present Cambyses as the legitimatesuccessor ofCyrus/* Thesecondinconsistencyisthementionof Cambyses' conquestof the"Ethiopians living near the border of Egypt" (3.97.'2), a conquest not referred tointheaccount of Cambyses' Ethiopian campaign, since even^this minor success would'have destroyed thepicture ofutterfailure whichwasHerodotus' aim. The" account of Dariusis the"fullestof thePersian logoi,for he symbolizes for Herodotus the height ofPersian power. Yet even
Hdt.1.192.Forthe notoriouspromiseof Assyrianlogoi,whicharenotfound in the extant work, see e.g. SchmidSthlin 1.2.561, note 3. Myres, Herodotus 9495, followsPowell,Hist.Herodotus1820and35,inassumingthat thissectionwasctually written,buthasbeenlost.Thisisbasedonanuncertain readinginAristotle" (Powell, op.cti.35). The campaign against the Massagetae has thesame function in the work as Cambyses*EthiopiancampaignandDarius'Scythianexpedition.Thesethreearethe mainfailuresof Orientalexpansionismbefore theattackon theGreeks'. ' Onthe geographicposition of E^ypt,seeCausation260,note38.IntheHippo cratictreatise On Airs,Waters,Places,Ch.12,Egypt islisted ona parwith the three continents, and coupled with Libya;cf. also,vanGroningen,Comp.litt.2j2,note2. I follow St'ein in the interpretation of 3;88:1, but cf. e.g. How and Wells, and (apparently)Powell, Lexicon,s.v.aSrts

32

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

GH. I.THE SUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES

33

here thestory is not quite complete. Herodotus knew theentire ancestry of.Darius back to Achaemenes (7.11), butin theearly partsof the.work Dariusappears merelyas theson of the noble Hystaspesand isnotof royalblood.'Another puzzlingaspect of thestofyaboutyoungDariusistheabruptnessofhisarrivalinSusa "from the Persians"to plot theoverthrow ofthe Magi (3.70.3). Elsewhere, Herodotus tells us that, at the time of Gyrus' death among the Massagetae, Darius (thenonly twenty yearsold) was livinginPersia(1.209.2),butthathe lateraccompaniedCambyses to Egypt as a spearbearer (3.139.2) and married a daughter of Gobryas (7.2.2), the man who later became one of theseven conspirators against the Magus. None of these facts is alluded toin theaccount of theoverthrow*oftheMagi.We arenot told howDarius hadreturned from Egyptto his home"inPersia," nor howhe happened tosuspect that theMagus and his brother were ruling. Herodotus has simply excluded, at the beginning of thelo^son theoverthrow of"the Magi,such information con cerningtheyoungDariusaswouldhaveconflictedwiththepicture of a usurper a'ppearing suddenly on the scene to take over the control of Asia and resurrect the Persian empire.^ His main concernis thereestablishment ofpower in Persia. Thisinterpretation is confirmed by Herodotus' account of the beginning,ofDarius' reign.Hei'e also,the historianknew afuller "story of troubles and revolts against the new king, but when Darius comes tothe thrpne, we aretold merely, "allwas fullof his,power" (3.88.3). We cannot ascertain, of course, whether Herodotus knew the list of campaigns mentioned by Darius himselfintheBhistuninscription,"^butinanotherplacehehints atthefermente^dsting at that time (3.127.1),and hegives us to understandthat Dariushad madeextensive preparations.against
Onthegenealogyof Xerxesin 7.11,seeCh.IV,npte63. Herodotus uses the words "Persians" and "Persia" in three geographical meanings: (1) thehomeland ofthe Persian tribeslisted in1.125.34.This isthe resi dence of Cyrus' parents (1.108.2; 120.6; 123.34), and the province of Hystaspes (1.209.2 and3.70.3, etc.).It is described asdistant from both Ecbatana (1.12and 123.4)andSusa(3.70.3;97.1,cf.91.4and5^49.7).Gf.also4.39.1.Thisregion(Parsa mash) is Darius' homeatthetimeof theoverthrowofthe Magus.(2) theJieartland ofthePersianempire,includigSusa,asinAeschylus'Persians (3.1.1,cf.30.3;8.98.1, cf.99.1).(3) thePersian Empireasawhole (7.8c.l;53.2,both inspeeches). "Ch.IV,17071. F.H.vi^eissbach,Die Keilinschriften der Achmeniden (Leipzig1911)8ff., especi allypara.1652.

the Magi before the conspiracy of the Seven.Elsewhere, he alludestoarevoltof theMedes,whichweknowto haveoccurred atthis time (althoughHerodotus doesnot dateit),and heknows that Darius was at one'time in Egypt, an event perhaps to be connectedwith thesameseriesofearly revolts.^We arenot ina positiontoknow, ofcourse, whetherHerodotus wasaware ofthe exactchronologyof theseevents,butitis temptingtoconnect his scatteredreferences withthetroublesof Darius'early reign. Ina similar offhand manner, Herodotus twice alludes to Darius' Indian campaign, but does not includeit among the campaigns hedescribes infull. The picture of Darius, although very detailed, is nevertheless stylized to a certain degree. A complete account is given of his accession, but very little is said about his origins or about his earlyreign.TheFarEasterncampaigns(India)arenotdescribed. Stressis laid oncampaigns inthe West (theregion ofthe Helles pont,Libya,Samos,Ionia,Greece) andoncampaignsofsymbolic significance(BabylonandScythia).TherebyHerodotushastaken from Darius some of his greatest successes and emphasized insteadhisHmitations."Thisselectivityiseven'morepronounced in thecase of Xerxes, whose Greekcampaign is alontreated in full, whereas the Egyptian is mentioned in'two short sentences (77)
I believe3.126.12 should beunderstood inthis sense,although thepassage is difficult. Oroetas, who had killed Polycrates while Cambyses was still living, was punished"notmuchlater"byDariusfor othermisdeeds,which occurred,according to the received text," after thec[eath,of Cambyses and the ruleof theMagi," but beforeDarius'accession (3.127.1).If thetextissound, thiscanrefer onlyto thetime when the ruleof theMagi'came'to anend, i.e.during theconspiracy ofthe Seven. At that timeOroetas killed a messenger ofDarius:themessage sentcan onlyhave been an appeal to come toSusa to participate in theconspiracy, since Dariuswas thenstill aprivate individual.I believe that thisis meant by Dariuswhen hesays: "andhe(Oroetas) killsthosethatsummonhimandaresentbyme"(3.127.3).Thus thestoryof themessengershould beplaced beforeDarius' accession,although ithas usually been undrstood in thesense that Darius, after his accession, was recalling Oroetas.Seee.g."Powell,Hist.Herodotus50; Howand Wellsadloc. " Median revolt: 1.130.2.Darius iri Egypt:2.110.23. TheBehistuninscription showsthat theMedian revoltwas'apartofthegeneral upheavalafter Darius'acces sion; sec Weissbach, op. cit. (above, note 53), para. 24. Olmstead, Hist.Pers. 142, datestheEgyptiancampaignin518B.C.,andothersdateitearlyalso,onthe basisof the mentionof anEgyptianrevolt earlyinDarius' reign(Behistun inscription,para. 21);seeH.Swoboda'inRE,s.v.DareiosNo. 1,2189,and G.B.GrayinCAH 4.181. SiHdt.4.44.13and 7.9.2.TheIndiancampaign alsoseemsto havetakenplace earlyinDarius* reign;seeOlmstead,Hist.Pers.14445; GrayinCAH4.183: " Ch.,IV,173.

34

FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

GH. I.THE SUBJECT OF THE HISTORIES

35

Thus Herodotus' use of material (besides giving an inkling of the nature of his sources) shows Certain guiding ideas. His history of the Eastern kingsis organizedasan Eastern narrative rather than as an account of the reciprocal quarrels between Eastand West,yetitis nota historyofthe East.Theemphasisis on the portraits of the Eastern kings as elements in thestory of thegrowthofAsiaticpower.Nevertheless,Easterndevelopmentis not delineated for its own sake; we note that certain conquests arenot describedin detail,so thatonly the resultingincreasein empireisstressed,and thataselectionofother conquestsismade principallyfortheirsymbolicsignificance.Whatisdevelopedwith greatclarityconcerns thehistoryof thecampaignsof theEastern monarchsintheWest,whetherdirected againstGreeksoragainst barbarin peoples in Europe and Africa. Despite the pattern of the Oriental chronicle,^Herodotus has not written a history of Persia. in How does the Greek elementfit into this^ unevenly balanced historyof the^East?From thestructuralpoint of.view,itmust be emphasized that prior to theaccount ofSalamis, except for the three logoi mentioned earlier, the Greek material (regardless of its real importance in the work) is throughout formally sub ordinated to the Easternsequence by beingattachejl to Eastern accountsinsections.Inthisrespect, theGreek storiesare treated in a manner'resembling (in a general'way) the ethnographic material.It hasbeen observed thatethnographic logoi arenearly always attached to the Eastern accounts atihe point where the nation in question is conquered, or attacked, by the East; and further, that the history ofsuch nations always ends at.the time of conquest, i.e. where they cease to have an autonomous'exis tenc'e.Herodotus hereundoubtedlyfollows,oradapts previously established patterns of ethnography. It is less clear that.similar patterns already existed for purely historical accounts. At any
Jacoby,Entwicklung 93ff.;Regenbogen, Werk 67f. (= Marg,Herodot 69f.). " ThesolutiontothisdifHcultproblemdependsinpartonthedatesthatshouldbe assignedtotheearliestGreekhistorianswhodealtwiththeEast,inparticularCharon ofLampsacusandXanthustheLydian,whoarethebest'known.SeeShmidSthlin 1.1.683 fF. L. Pearson, Early Ionian Historians (Oxford 1939) 2ff., 116 (Xanthus), 13940(Charon),supportsthearlydating,andJacoby, III,G,Vol.2(Leiden

rate, Herodotus has extendedthe principle used for barbarian ethnographic material to the more properly historical material dealing with the Greeks. Before Salamis, the principal Greek logoi are attached to the Eastern narrative at points of contact between theEast andthe Greekstates. Itfollows thatHerodotus nowherepresentsuswithacontinuous Greekhistory, butthathis methodshowshereaneven greaterselectivitythanin theEastern accounts. Thefirst separate Greek logos in the work (although not the first mentionofthe Greeks) isthestoryof Arionand theDolphin (1.2324).AsMyreshaspointedout,thestoryinvolvestwoseparate motifs :(1 ) the greatnessof theCorinthian tyrant Perianderand (2) themiraculousrescue ofArion. By placingthesecond motif in the center of thestory,and thefirst at the beginningand the end, Herodotus was able to connect it formally with the East, for Periander had helped Thrasybulus of Miletus in his war againstAlyattes king of Lydia. This connection has often been criticizedassuperficial,^buttheprincipleisthesameasthatused for thenext Greek logos^ thehistory ofAthens and Sparta down tothetime ofCroesus (1.56.268). JacobyandPohlenzhavesuggestedconvincinglythat,inattach ingthislogostothestoryofCroesus'searchforGreekallies,Herod otus follows the pattern of the later account^ which concerns a similar quest by Aristagoras of Miletus at the beginning of the Ionian Revolt (5.3996). Thisquest Wasinfact better known to Herodotus, and it has a much better claim to historicity. Aristagorasfirst went'toSparta, and having been refused there,
1958) 750 (Xanthus),and III,A (1943) 12 and1718 (Charon), thelate. In Ent wicklung 8990, Jacoby thinks, nevertheless, that the historical sections in ethno graphic logoi derive from earlier^historical literature on Persians and Lydians (a literaturewhichitselfderivedfromethnography)jbutheadmitsthathistoricalnotices occurred alreadyin purelyethnographic works. (Soalso E.Norden, Die Germanische Urgeschichte in Tacitus' Germania [1922]'25.) However, historical works^earlier than Herodotus arevery shadowy; hence theorigins of theHerodotean combination of historywith ethnographyareuncertain. DifferentlyJacoby,seeabve,note 40;cf.also below,note67. Myres,Herodotus8384. Cf alsoH.Erbse,Gymnasium68(1961) 250,and C.M. Bowra,AfW20 (1963)12134. E.g.SchmidSthlin1.2.604f. "Jacoby,RESuppl.2.38283;Pohlenz, Herodot 41,also34and 36.Jacoby'saim is toshow thatthe Athenian andSpartan historyoriginally formed anindependent lecture. Pohlenz is concerned with the work as itstands, but if Iunderstand him correctly,healso thinksofthehistoryofAthensandSparta asaunit.

36

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. I.THE SUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES

37

concluded anallianceinAthens.Theorderoftheinquiriesishere thereverse ofthat followed byCroesus,sincethelatterconcluded analliancewithSparta,andtheGreekcityconcludingthealliance is ofcourse placedsecond.InbothinstancesHerodotushasadded certainspecificaccountstoexplainthepower (orlackofpower)of Athens and Sparta in these two periods. Jacoby and Pohlenz, however, went one step further and claimed that the four re sultingsections, together with theirshort introduction, arereally a unified historyof Athens andSparta respectively,each artifici ally rent asunder.The whole complex would have thefollowing form;
1. Introduction:origins of Dorian Sparta and Pelasgian Athens (1.56.258). 2. Athens"under Peisistratus(1.5964). 3. Sparta'searlyhistorydown tothewar withTegea (1.6568). 4. Sparta'stroublewith'herroyal house (5.3948). 5. Athens, from the end of tyranny to the time of the Ionian Revolt (5.5596).

was of much longer duration*: thus it is simply another Greek

logosattached toEastern history.Therefore, despitethegeneral introductionto thefirst AthenianndSpartan logoi,whichforms

This scheme is based in part on the correct observation that thesecond Spartan section begins with a direct reference to the endof thefirst. Thisbackwardreference,however,is occasioned by.thefactthat theAthenian andSpartanlogoi followeachother in theorder ABBA, with theSpartan logoi occupying the inner positions. Between the two Athenian sections there is no such continuity. There is, to be sure, a contrast between Athens helddownby tyrannyand Athensstrengthened bythe establish ment of democracy, with the murder of Hipparchus at the beginningofthesecondAthenianlogos(5.55)formingaconnecting hnk between these two pictures. At thesame time, between the two accounts there exists a gap, which comprises the later rule anddeathofPeisistratusandmost oftherulofhissons.Thusthe twoAthenianlogoi donot presentacontinuoushistoryofAthens. ThesameisactuallytrueofthetwoSpartanlogoi,forathirdlogos on Sparta, describing hostilities with Argos over Thyrea, inter venes between them and is not in any way tied in (1.82.183). ThislastlogostellsonlythatpartofthestrifeoverThyreawhichis contemporarywith Croesus, although^friction over the territory
" Hdt.5.39.1,cf.1.67.L, Pohlenz,Herodot 34. DifferentlyPohlenz,Herodot 36.

akindofprehistoryofGreece,Herodotushasselectedhismaterial tofit theimmediatesurroundingso)hisseveral logoi.How much he has omitted can be seen from Myres' list of Athenian and Spartanevents mentionedin other partsof thework,' No other Greek logoi occur until the'end of Cambyses' cam paigns in Book 3. There the Spartan war against Polycrates of Samos (which follows the story of Cambyses' madness) is con nected with the account of Cambyses by an initial synchronism totheeffectthatthewartookplace"whileCambyseswasfighting against Egypt,' i.e. at a time already passed in the narrative. Hence this logos is told in retrospect, as an afterthought to the Cambyseslogoi.Thestoryofthedeathof Polycrates,ontheother hand, is shifted forward in the narrative (it actually occurred "approximately at the time of Cambyses' illness," 3.120.1) and attached to the story of the fate of his murderer, the Persian Oroetas,who was killed by command ofDarius after thelatter's accession (3.12628). In the same way, the story of the Greek doctor Democedes is treated as a Persian story, depending as it
WeleamfromThucydides 5.41 thatThyrea andall Gynuriawere aconstant sourceoffriction wellinto the PeloponnesianWar, butthe storyin Herodotusis of the timeof Croesus.Sparta occupied Thyreatisshortly before the battleof the300 (soG.Busolt,GriechischeGeschichte^ 1[Gotha1893]595,note3),i.e.duringtherwgnof Croesus.Argosassisted herterritory,andthisled atoncetotwobattles:(1)thebattle ofthe300,inwhichbothsidesclaimed.victory;itwasfamousinantiquity,andisthe onlybattlecited inThuc.5.41.(2) amassbattle, inwhichSpartawasvictorious(cf. Plutarch, Apophth.Lac.231E). Afterthb theArgivescut theirhair andforbadetheir womentowear golduntiltheyhadregainedThyreatis.Thus,whenCroesus'messengers arrived,theSpartans must haveexpected arenewed attack;despitethis, theymade ready to'assist their Lydian friend, but were too late, since Sardis was captured unexpectedlyearly (Herodotusdoes not implythat thewarwith Argosdelayed the Spartans).The secondbattlewas decisive :atthetimeofGleomenes*Argive expedition Thyreawasheld bySparta(6.76.2;Stein'scommenton1.82, line5isinerror),arid Thucycidesalso implies nofurther battles (5.41, cf. 4.56and 5.14).Hence 1.8283 maybeconsideredacontinuationof SpartanactivitiesinthePeloponnesus,mentioned inthefirst Spartanlogos (cf.1.68.6), butHerodotus doesnot stress thisconnection. What is important to him is the contrast in the fortunes of Sparta and Croesus' symphor,which is paralleled by thechanges of custom (as the result of changesof fortune) in Sparta and Argos. For historical detail see Pieske, RE,s'.v. Kynuria, 4445;WadeGery,CAH3.569 ;andA.Brelich,Guerre,agonie cultinellaGreia archaica (1961) 22 fF. Cf.alsoCh. II,note26. Myres,Herodotus 177ff. Hdt. 3.39.1. For furthersynchronismswith Cambyses'activities, seeCh. III, 9899.

38

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. I.THE SUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES

39

doeson theillnesses ofDarius andAtossa (3.129.1and 3.133.1) ^ecentralepisodeofthe logosis thebedchamberscene,inwhich Darius and Atossa discuss the conquest of both Greece and Scythia. From the Ionian Revolt on, the narrative concerns'primarily themteraction ofGreeks and Persians, but there arestillseveral independentGreek logoi.Wehave alreadyseenhow theaccounts of. Spartaand Athensareattached tothe visits of Aristagoras at thebenmngoftheIonianRevolt.Lateron,thestoryofMiltiades IS divided into a number of sections, some of which arein the form of separate logot. Thefirst of these shows Miltiadesfleeing the Chersonese and pursued by 'the Phoenician navy after the onianRevolt (6.34.141.4). Followingtheaccountofthebattleof Marathon, thereis the logos of.Miltiades'attempted conquest of Faros,hisinjuryandhisdeath,astorytowhichisaddedhisearlier conquestof Lemnosfor the benefitof Athens,nfulfilment ofan oracle (613236; 13740). Theattackon Paros'belongswith the aftereffectsof Marathonand.thusdifferssomewhat Tromthelo eoi herediscussed,for itresembles ratherthe independent narratile after Salaims (in particular, 'Themistocles' punitive campaign against Andros)^Thecaptureof Lemnosin turnisan explana tion added tothe Pananadventure (thecapture had been men tioned,infact,duringthelasttrialof Miltiades),butitdoes have an connectionwiththe Persiannarrativein thereference to the Hellespont at theend.'i Theselast two logoi thus have a more remote connection with Persian action, through their dependenceon Marathonand itsconsequences Morecicelyconnectedwith Persian historyisthelongaccount otGreek affairswhichfollows theembassiessentbyDarius tothe Greek states with the demand of earth ^nd water (6.49941) ThislogoscontainsagooddealofSpartanroyalhistory, amofigft especiallythelastpartofCleomenes'reign,butfromthestructral pointofviewItshouldbecalledanAeginetanlogos,sinceitbegins andends,withthestoryof thehostages exactedfrom Aeginaand depositedinAthens.Threasonfor thecollectionofhostagesws thefactthattheAeginetans,likeotherGreekislanders,hadgiven earthand water toDarius (6.49.1).Thusthe organizationof this
" Hdt.3.134.Causation261and 271,note60. " Ch.III,140. "Action25.

logosdependsentirelyonthepointofconta'ct betweenDariusand

theAeginetans.'^ The famous digression on the Alcmaeonids, which follows the account of Marathon and precedes thestoryof Miltiadeson Paros(6.12131), likewiseowesits placetoa connection withthe Persians,for Herodotus beginsit by defending them against the chargeofflashing ashieldsignaltotheenemyduringtheinvasion ofAttica (6.121.1).Orientalconnectionsarestillbasic .forthelast of the great Greek logoi, thepreparationsofihe Greeks against Xerxes' invasion (7.13278). Thisaccount is usullyanalyzed as action paralle]withthe preparationsand marchofXerxes,' but it is in fact subordinated to the Eastern narrative in two ways. First, itis attached to Xerxes' stayin Pieria after his arrivalin Greece (7.131andagain 177),'^andspecifically tothestatement that Xerxes' invasion, \vhile nominally directed against Athens, really concerned all of Greece (7.138.jl). Secondly, its internal structureis entirelydependent onthe stagesof X^erxes' marchas given in the narrative.' Itis thelast logos in tjie work to beso treated. TheseletailsconcerningtheindependentGreeklogoihavebeen necessary in order to show their attachment to the Eastern narrative in the manner of ethnographic logoi for nonGreeks. These are,of, course, by no means the only places where Greek materialisfoundinthework.Muchofitoccursin thecampaigns of the Lydian and Persian kings (especially the campaigns of Croesus and his ancestors, the several Ionian campaigns, the conquest ofSamos, thecampaign against Gyrene in Libya, and the Persian W^rs in the widest sense), but not the least part is found worked into the remainder of the Eastern narrative wherever possible. Throughout the Histories, as Pohlenz has shown, Herodotus emphasizes all possible Greek connections withthe East.'We mustdistinguish, therefore,between internal emphasis on Greek material and.outer connections between the principallogoi^connectionswhicharemainlybasedontheEastern narrative.Inoutlining,aswehavedone,theoverallorganization, we cannot do full justice to the Greek subjects treated in the
"SeeCh.III,12122. Cf.generallyPohlenz,Herodot 42and89, andCh. III,13337. Fordetails,seeCh.III, 133. " Ch.III,136. Pohlenz,Herodot 9ff.

40

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. I.THE SUBJECT OFTHE HISTORIES

41

work, but we may discover its general plan. We note, then, that from the beginning to the battle of Salamis the external structure of thework is almost entirely based on the Eastern accounts, towhich theGreek materialissubordinated.
IV

The work of Herodotus is arranged as a chain of logoi,with the individual items strung along in a single row and usually framed by introductory and concluding sentences. Thisseries is arrangedaccordingtothesimpleprincipleof actionandcounter action.Whenever theEast has theinitiative (and thatis truefor mostofthework),thenarrativefollowstheEasternlineofdevelop ment,andonlywheretheGreeksthemselvesinitiateactiondoesa change in structure occur. Herodotus' history is primarily a history of action."As mentio'ned abo^e, the Greeks show such initiativethreetimes(inthePrsianciqestofIonia,theSpartan waragainstPolycrates,andtheIonianRevolt),untilwithSalamis thenarrative asawhole changesto theaffairsof thevictors.The battle description, with its symmetrical arrangement of action and counteraction around a central point, quite naturally lends itselfto ashiftofemphasisfrom onecontestant totheother.' ThecentralstoriesintheEasternseriesarethoseoftheaccession andcampaignsoffour Prsiankingswhoform twopairsoffather and son: Cyrus and Cambyses, and Darius and Xerxes. The accessionstoriesof Cyrusand Dariusareimportant toHerodotus as the crucial links in the development of power in Asia, The campaigns of thefour kings are tteated with a definite Western bias, so that their Asiatic wars are described only in part.This portion of the Histories (from Cyrus' Ionian conquest to Darius' Greek campaigns) shows a straightforward development and closeinner unity. At the beginningand end of thechain, thesituation is notso simple.Thedirect linefromthe predecessorsof thePersians (the Assyriansand Medes) to thecampaignsof Cyrus, thefounderof the Persian empire, has been disturbed by placing thedefeat of Lydiafirst in the work, a procedure which necessitated putting the history of Assyria and Media into a "digression." We are not here concerned with the question of when Herodotus
Action16 fF. " cai.VI,23839.

did this, but only why it was done.' We have previously noted the doubleframing of the Croesus Logos with statements regardingCroesus' empire over Western Asia and hisattacks on the Greeks. We may now say that, in thefirst place, the trans position of theCroesus Logos helpsto underlinethe theme of the unification and growth of Asiatic power; Herodotusstresses the unificationoftheWesternpartanditsabsorptionintotheEastern, beforegivinganexplanationoftheearlierconquestoftheEastern portion bythe Persians. Itis clear, however, that this idea could have been expressed equallywellby tellingthestoryinitsproperchronologicalorder: AssyriaMediaFoundingof PersiaOverthrowof Lydia. We must therefore use thesecond framing statement (the attack on the Greeks) in explaining the shift of the Croesus' Logos to the beginning of the work. Herodotus begins with the part of Asia situated nearest the West, because the Western expansion of Persia is his main concern from the start. Among the Western campaigns, those directed against Greee are in turn the most important to him. Since Herodotus considered the Greeks th "forefighters" (as hewould havecalled them)in thebattle ofall Europe against all Asia, he' ehiploys the Greek narrative as the focus of his general Western' emphasis. Consequently, we find intheCroesus Lgosaclusteror Greeklogoi andother Greek references, such a the attacks on Greek citiesin Asia Minor by eachoftheLydiankings,evenwheretheyweremereraids{harpa gai).Thefirst major war of the work is thesiege of Miletus by Alyattes,^ to which the story of Arion and the Dolphin is an
" Seeabove,note28. OnthecontrastbetweenAsia andEurope,seebrieflyCausation263,note42. H. Berve,"DerEuropabegrifTderAntike,"inGestaltende Krfteder Antike(1949) 17087. Pohlenz,Herodot21fF.and 205fF. C.van Paassen, TheClassical TraditionofGeography (Groningen 1957), Gh. 3, passipi,esp. 96, and note 36. Cf. also Oliver, Demokratia 11820,andPlate1. D.Hay, Europe:The EmergenceofanIdea(Edinburgh1957).A.]. Toynbee,AStudyofHistory,Vol.8(1954)70829.G.PuglieseCaratelli, PP40 (1955) 519. TimesLit.Suppl.(January17, 19^8) 34. ^Hdt.1.16.222.4,and25.1.Thewaristoldslightlyoutofcontext:(1) itorigina ted with Sadyattes, the predecessor of Alyattes, butit isnot mentioned under his rule(1.16.1).(2) itwasAlyattes'first war(sinceheinheriteditfromhisfather),butit istoldatthe endofhisreign,afterthementionofhiswarswithCyaxaresandtlieCim meriansandhisraidsagainst SmyrnaandClazomenae (1.16.2).Herodotuscallsthe warwithMiletus"mostworthyof mention"(1.16.2);however, hetellsitnot outof curiosity,butbecauseitwasthefirst realconflictbetweenGreeksandtheEastknown

42

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

GH. I.THE SUBJECT.OFTHE JfSTORlES

43

addition.Arion,Periander,Solon,andBiasorPittacus(depending ontheversion wefollow)formaseries ofGreek personalitieswho contrast\yithCroesusthe.Oriental ruler,andthelatter's relations withDelphiinitiate animportant religious themein thework. Another and much larger cluster of Greek logoi develops naturally in the second half of the work, beginning with the Ionian Revolt and endingwith thecapture ofSestusin 479B.C. Thesereferences may bedivided intotwo phases :beforeSalamis theGreekmaterialisstilllargelysubordinated toPersian actions, whileafterwardsitisreallyindependent.Lookingattheworkasa whole, wcf.may say that theGreek material has thefunction of establishirtgthetwocutswhichbeginandendthechainofEastern action.The<vorkbeginswithCroesusandendswiththeexpulsion ofthe Persiansfrom'Europe. Thestructur..oftheHistoriesisverysimple.Theworkisachain of logoi >vith'special emphasis at the beginning and a similar, if greater, emphasis at the end. Such a chain of stories is itself a typically Herodotean logos^ as we shall see in the next chapter. The formal arrangement of the work is characteristic of early Greekprose. Theproblemnow istodetermine whethera unified conceptionof thesubjectunderlies thisplan. TheHistories beginandendwith GreekrelationswiththeEast: first enslaved by Croesus, Greeksfinally defeat the Persians on Greek soil. Between these two extremes, however, thesubject of the work is the growth of the unified power of Asia under the Persiansa theme very much lafgr than EastWest relations (althoughitincludes them).TheGreek material,by establishing theouterlimitsoftheEasternlogoi,helpstodefineaspecialperiod of Eastern history, namely that in which the Eastern empires attacked the West. In this manner the Greelc stories contribute tothedefinition ofthesubjectof thePersianlogoi themselves ihe Historiesdeal not with Persian history per'se, but with the unifi cation of Asi, the attempted extension of empire beyond,the borders of the continent, and the failure of this attempt. This period began at the time of Croesus and was checked when the Persians were driven out of Europe by the Greeks. Unlike,a modern historian, who would show the gradual development.of
tohimthatcouldfind itsplaceatthebeginningofthework.Subsidiarythemesofthe logosare Alyattes'religiouscrimes,the Delphicmotif, andthecooperation of Greek statesinthetimeofthetyrants.

power politics, Herodotus assumes that the basic motivation expansionismwas a permanent^ feature of Eastern monarchy. Thisdesirefor aggrandizementfirst becameapparent duringthe conquest of Western Asia by the Lydians (a conquest which necessarilyincluded the Greeksof Asia Minor), as wellas'inthe subjugation of the Eastern part by the Medes Expansion con tinued further through the conquests of Cyrus.both'in.the East and in the West, and advanced still another step in Cambyses' conquest of Egypt and his attempted attack on the African Ethiopians. Under Darius, expansionism became the ajttempt to conquerallcontinents :Europ'e,inhis,attacksagainsttheScythians and the Greeks; and Libya, througha war conducted by oneof Darius' satraps.This policy was checked fojever by thevalor of theGreeks whoopposed Xerxes. Theworkbeginsandendsatpointsthatarenot"atallarbitrary. The end is particularly aj^propriate, for it comes when the Persian hasleft Europeand thecontinents areseparate, as they had been originally. It is hard to believe,jtherefore,that'Herod otus' work has been left incomplete..^ The symbolic conclusion oftheHistoriesisthededicationofthebrokenHellespontinecables, with whichXerxes hadonce connected Asia arid Europe. The proem likewise m,ust be understood from the.basic the matic structure of the work. Itis closely connected with the Croesuslj>gos andin particular'develops (as Pohlenz has,rightly observed) theideaof the EastWesjconflict between Greeksand barbarians. The proem'stresses the second framing element of the Croesus Logos more thanit does the'first. This is natural, since its.aim is to establisl^ thefigure of Croesusfirmly at the beginning of the work, bt .we must not take the EastWest conflictasa.completedescriptionoft^esubject.Dealingprimarily with purposeand method, theprem defines thecontents of the work merely byestablishing.thebeginningof theseriesofactions that make up the Histories. So far as the subject of the work is concerned, the proeinstresses mainlya basictheme, namelythe permanenthostilitybetweenGreeksandPersians,orbetweenAsia
Above,Introductio,810. Therelationoftheproen\tothework maybeschematizedasfollows(Astands forthe motifof thegrowthofi^atj,cpower, Bfbr theEastWest conflict): .B,Proei. B,proesus Lt^os. .. B. A,OriginsofPersia... ,etc.

44

FORM ANDTHOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

CH. I.THE SUBJECT OF THE HISTORIES

45

and Europe (1.4.4). At thesame time, the proem calls attention to Persia's hybris'in seeking world dominion bystating that the PersiansthemselvesconsideredAsiatobetheirs,butEuropeto be separate.Theunityof theworkconsistspartlyintheemphasison thedisregardshownbythePersiankings,intheirWesternattacks, ofthisnativedoctrine,whichisrecalledatthe endoftheHistories. A characteristicfeature of early Greek literature is its refusal toconceive ofunity inthe abstract;instead,it perceivesitin the concrete development of a series. Hence the unity of the work must beestablished bylooking at thewholechainoflogoi,rather thanby theanalysisof theproem.This unityisnevertheless real. Itconsistsof thehistoryof Persian powerand aggressivenessina welldefined period in which aggression affected the Greeks. It does not consist of Persian history per se, or of the EastWest conflict alone. Thelatter is a subsidiary theme, no matter how decisivelyitmayinfluence'the"presentation ofthe mainsubject. The Histories derive their subject from the particular view which the Greeks had of the importance of theirfight against Persia,and is thereforesimilarto theviewsfound in the Persians of Aeschylus. The two works have in common their Oriental structure, by which the unity of viewpoint is manifested in the description of the effect of the Persian Wars upori the Persians themselvesratherthan theeffect uponthe Gree.Aeschylusand Herodotustreat thesame subject, whichis"Persai"thenation that came todestroy "us"and instead destroyed themselves by frustrating their own aspirations. Infilling in the antecedents ofthisstruggle (a problemwhich Aeschylusdid not havetoface tothesameextent),Herodotussimplyassumedthatthecharacter ofPersia,andof theEastiftgeneral,hadalwaysbeen whatitwas known to be during the Persian Wars. Therefore he wrote the history of those Persians (and their predecessors) whose expan sionist drive had always been a da'nger to "our" existence. Herodotus' history is thus in thefirst instance patriotic history,
Hdt.1.4.4=9.116.3.' OntherelationsbetweenHerodotus'workandAeschylus'PersiansseeHauvette, Hrodote125, note2,and Pohlenz,Herodot 116,note3.Theetymologyof"Persians" fromWpflw(todestroy),bywhichthePersians are seenas destroyersand selfdestroyers, isfundamentaltotheplay (e.g.line65),butit isfoundinHerodotmonlyinthetext oftwooracles,7.220.4and8.77.1.Nevertheless,the selfdestrtictivetendenciesof Persia arealso stressed bythe historian,although indifferent ways,e.g. in thefinal story aboutXerxes'lovesin Book9,on whichseenow thepaperby E.Wolffcited below, Ch.IV,note96.

but he gave his theme a wider significance by describing the Greeks as theexponents ofa particular way of lifeandasrepre sentativesofa wholecontinentonwhich thisway oflifewasable toflourish. He alsoshowed by whatlaws in theworld ofhistory absolutism was bound to fail. The treatment of Eastern history andof thewars ofAsia withGreece is thusdeveloped intuitively fromageneralconceptionofwhat theGreekstruggleforfreedom reallymeantforthehistoryoftheworld.Itisdifficuhtoformulate such a conception with precision, and perhaps for this reason Herodotus' work hasnever hada precisetitle.

CH.II. STYLE AND'STRUCTURE

47

ChapterII STYLE AD STRUCTURE

I

Since1924, whenHermann Frankel'sfundamental paper, "A StylisticPeculiarity of Early Greek Literature,"laid thefounda tion for the study of the style of early Greek poetry and prose, there have been repeated attempts to cite Herodotus as an exampleofthatstyle. Frnkelhimselfused Herodotuswithmuch insight, but stopped short of admitting the unity of the work, sinceintheview thenprevalent theHistorieswereacompound of heterogeneous partscomposed at different timesa view which had beenonlyrecently upheld byFelixJacoby (1913).^Further more, thestylisticanalysis ofearly Greekliterature, byfollowing Aristotle's observation of a contrast between a paratactic, or "strungalong," and a periodic, or "knittogether" style,^ was carried on under the shadow of a superior classical model, the periodicstyleoffourthcenturyoratory.Thismethodemphasized unduly(andthesamebiasisstillfoundinmorerecentstudies)the negativeaspectsofthe" archaic " ascontrastedwiththe" classical " style: a book on early Greek composition published a few years ago still contains the statement that archaic works show only restrictedorganic unity.Thisclassicistic prejudice(ifImay call itthat)hastemptedsomescholarswhohavecontinuedthestudies ofFrnkel(amongthemespeciallytheDutchscholarsvanOtterlo and van Groningen) to construct stylistic systems that look suspiciouslylikeattemptstoreplaceclassicalbyanearlier archaic rhetoric.However,ancient rhetoricisamatterofgiving practical advice (in theformofrules) tocontemporary writers,and in the early period such rules did not.exist. Stylistic analysis of early Greekliterary worksaims atthe discoveryofpatternsobservable in actual practice, which do not have the authority of school m'axims and are not systematized. Despite the interest in early
^Frankel, Stileigenheit.Jacoby, RESuppl.2.281ff. *Arist.Rhet. 3.1409a24. ' Van Groningen,Comp. litt.8ff. and 337. Cf.G. M.Kirkwood in Gnomon 32 (I960)41421.

Greek poetry and prose, a full investigation of Herodotus' style hasnot beenmade, althoughhis workhas beenafertilesourceof examples to illustrate the style of other authors.^ The present chapterlikewise makes no attempt atsuch an analysis, but tries topresent afew guidingideasthat may be usefulfor the under standingsof the organization of the work. In doing so, it relies heavily onthe studiesofearlier writers. It is a ba.sic feature of early prose that the principles under lyinglargeunits ofcomposition areequally applicableIpsmaller entities down toa short phrase, asentence, a brief remark, or a story. In the preceding chapter, we have usecj one ubiquitous featureof thissort, theparatactic chain ofitems,in thatcase the individual logoi of the whole work. Eduard Norden has called such items, in their simplest form, "Aiflimembers." Herodotus inherited this style from Hecataeus and other predecessors, among whom itflourished by virtue of its appropriateness for listsofgeographicalnames andforthedescriptionof animalsand humancustoms.'Infact,someof theHerodoteanpassagesof this
*Aly,Formprobleme, passim.Van Groningen,Parataci.Comp. 11ff., andComp,litt., passim. J.Haberle, Untersuchungen ber den ionischen Prosastil (Diss. Munich 1938). K. Mart, "Herodots Pro'sastil," Eg>etemes Philologiai Kzni (Budapest"1943) 125, isnotknowntome.J. Notopoulos," ParataxisinHomer : ANewApproachtoHomeric Literary Criticism," 80 (1949) 25; cf.also Notopoulosin r^P.4.82 (1951) 81ff.Van Ottrlo, Ring^ompositioh,esp.164,notes 12,and passim. VanOtterlo'(see above,Introduction,not&24),andH.MetteinGnomon23(1951)223. G.Phlraann, Dearte quafabellaeHerodoteae ^arjatae sjnt (Diss. Gttingen 1912).T. B. L.Webster, Language and Thought in Early Greece, Memoirs and Proceed. Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. 94 (195253) 1738, bears only indirectly on Herodotus. More generally on Herodotus' style: Frnkel, Stileigenheit, section reprinted in Marg, Herodot 726ff. Pohlenz,.//worfo/207ff. (= Marg,Herj}dot 737ff.). J.D.Denniston,GreekProse Style (Oxford 1952) 5ff. Cf.alsoJ.A.K.Thomson, The Artof the Logos (London1935), passim. W.J.Verdenius, "L'Association des idescomme principede composition dansHomre,Hsiode,Thognis," REG73 (I960) 34561. " ' VanGroningen,Comp.litt.91,i\ote 1. E.Norden, Agnostos Theos (Leipzig1913), AppendixVH:"Lexiseiromeni." On theAafstyleinAtticandlaterGreekliterature(abroaderviewthanispresentedhere) seeS.Trenkner, LeStyle kaidans le rcit attigueoral (Assen'I960),known tome only fromreviews in CR,n.s. 11 (1961) 290 (HudsonV^illiams) and Mnemosyne',ser. 4, 14 (19I) 24247 (Bolkestein). I ^m not familar with Trenkner, "Lexis tiromenS Herodots,"Charisteria.. .G.Przyckocki(Warsaw1934) 295311. ' Onthestyleof Hecataeusanditsrelation tothatof Herodotus,seeJacoby,RE s.v.Hekataios,274850;Frnkel,Stileiger^it 62ff.; L.Pearson, EarlyIonian Historians (Oxford1939) 29ff. Forthe relationofstyleandsubject matter,seealsoAly,Form Probleme44ff. AlycriticizesFrnkel'sdistinction betweenthe styleofHecataeus and thatof Herodotus,and claims(with someexaggeration) thatstylegoes withsubject matter,notwith theindividualauthor.

46

48

FORMAN THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. II.STYLE AND STRUCTURE

49

kind are quotations from Hecataeus. On 'a large scale, the principleisusedbyHerodotusinhisgreatlists:thePersiansatrapy listofBook 3,the Persianarmyand navylistsin Book 7,and the various rosters of Greek forces. Other af>plications of the'same principlearethemarchsectionsofsomecamf>aignlogoi,especially Darius' mrch into Scythia and Xerxes' march into Greece. Moresignificant, because more pervasive, arethe chainsof logoi in the accounts of the Eastern kings, especially thesequences of theirmilitary exploits. The'^paratactic'style is not, as is sometimes thought, a con tinuosstyle;onthecoritrary,its'effectisdiscontinuity.Thebasic effect of parataxis is the safeguarding of the autonomyf the individualmembersinthechain.ThedescriptionofTliermopylae containsthefollowinggroup'ofstatements: Thereareinthisentrancewarmsprings,,whichthenatives call cauldrons//and an altar of Heracles is built above th^.// A v^llhad been builtacross theentrance// andof old thei;e was agatein it.(7.176.3) It'cannotbedeniedthatinthisdescriptionthesingleitems,which areof great importancefor the account f the.battle,stand out ve^ clearly. The discontinuous characterof parataxis can be seen'fiii^therintheinsertionofshortitemsintothebreaksbetween theiflimembrsofthe^original,chain;this isespeciallycommonin thedescriptionof Xerxes' march,wherenotesofvarioussortsare added toalmost everysta'ge of the.m^rch. Thusthe paratactic chain,through.thesimpleexpedient'of.fiUing thepauses between itsmemberswithindependentstoriesorotheritemsofinformation, iscapableofunhmiteddevelopment,whichcancreateconsiderbe complexity, although itcan hardly build dramatic tension. One feelsin thesedescriptions arelaxation ofpressure towardtheend ofthe narrative,and,becauseof constantinterruptionsfuneven length,acertain ^*jerkiness"in theprogression. Atthesame time, early prose develops anumber of devices, some of them borrowed from poetry, in order to connect the independentitems of the chain.These devices take the place of the'subordination whichis found in the later priodicstyle. We find hereanmbeofseparateelementswHichinitiatetheseveral
Hdt.4.83ff.and7.26ff. Ch.HI,13033.

units of the chain, among them (besides simple connective particles) repeated nouns and adjctives, participial phrases summarizingcertainaspectsof theprecedingnarrative,and even separate phrases related^both to the end of'thelast item.and.to thebeginningofthenext.'^*^Such.features .arefoundwelldeveloped inHecataeus,andinHerodotus,asFrnkelhaswellsaid,theyare developed to such a degree that at times they tend to become almost independent units in themselves. WhereasrHecataeus connects where hem^ust, Herodotus connects! where hecan, and hisstyle,is anornateform ofearly prose. Eduard Norden deriyed thestyle of early literaturefrom two typesofrelationships : parataxisandantithesis,orAraimembersand members.^^However,antithesisisnot,inHerodotus,orfoi^that matter in early prose generally, on a par vfith parataxis. The disjointed paratactic style leads naturally tp the addition of members thatstand inopposition to the mainsequence ina list or an argument, and it is this subsidiary useof antitliesis thatis characteristicofHerodotus.Trueantithesisis'avoidedevenwhere we would expect it.This is deliberate,for Herodotus knows the antithetic style; he uses it in conversations and, especially, in formalspeechesfound primarily,inthelater books. In ordinary narrative, antithesis is principally an aspect of polarity, by which bothelements of anantithesis are thought to coexist. Thus wefind antithesis commonly usedfor statements whicharereallycomplementary.Onaverysimplelevelwehave; Croesus,on theonehand,wasa Lydianby tirth,ontheother hand,he wasthesonof Alyattes. (1.6.1) ^ At the same time, antithesis is.avoided where we might expect tofind it: f i Theendsoftheworld possess themost beautifulthings,justas Greecepossesses seasonsmost beautifullymixed. (3.106.1)
Frnkel, Stileigenheit 63 f. Van .Groningen, Comp. lilt. 36ff., etc. Pohlenz, Herodot 209f. Frnl^el,Stileigenheit 65. E.Norden, Agnostos Theos(Leipzig 1913),Appendix,VIL r ''SchmidSthlin 1.2.574, note 2, lists 57 cases of antithesis in Herodotus. Of these, 30 occur in speeches. Actually, only 29 out of the 57 examples are intrue antithesis, and of these 19 are in direct discourse.The only frequent expression is "wordanddeed,"which isnot,of course,a trueantithesis. On^larity,secH.Frnkel, Dichtung und Philosophie,index 60305. E.g.Hdt. 3.127.1: Darius knew that the Persian Oroetas had great power, rv Iltpaw fhopvtf)peov,exe VOFIV TV T0pvyiov Kai ABiovxai'IOVIKV.

50

FORAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. U.STYLE AND STRUCTURE

51

The underlyingidea hereis thatof acontrast between the ends of the world,'where wefind the most beautiful things, and the centerof the world (namely Greece) where we donotfind such extremes.Thisisexpressed,notasanantithesis,butasacompari sonbetweentwostatesthatareeqally"beautiful,"namelyastate ofextremesandastateofmixtureorblance.^ Thisimpliesthat boththe ends and thecenter of'thworld arepartsof the'same worldorderandthattheyarebothequallydesirable.Theelement ofcomplementary balanceoutweighs thatofantithesis.^ True antithesis, then, is used in the narrative only in a very restricted sense; additions tothe chain ologoi (which arereally complementary), some argumentative passages, comparisons of customs of foreign peoples, and at times special expressions usedfordramatic effect.^''Thislast use,of oxymoron,is perhaps dueto theinfluenceof tragedy :
(The'Persians) showed clearly to everybody, and not least to the King, that they consisted of many people, but few men.

individuals and nations, as well as in pictures of contradictory behavior of one and thesame person, especially in thefigure of Xerxes and of the Persians during the invasion of 480 B.C. None of these themesfinds an adequate representation in anti theticalstructure.They aredescribedratherin thejuxtaposition of autonomous members of a chain, often with'the implication thatthey should'becomparedwith eachtherbythe reader. n In what manner was Herodotus able to build alarge unified workoutof amosaic ofsmallelementshisinheritancefrom the archaic typeof composition we havedescribed?Theconnecting linksbetweenindividualunitsseem toreachoutonlysofarasthe immediatelyprecedingandfollowingnarrative,andthisishardly enough to establish a substantial connection between major unitsof narrative. However, the paratacticstyle allowsfor great variety in thesize and composition ofits members, and.by this meanscomplexityis introducedas anaid tounification.We may speakofirregular emphasis.Itistruethatearly narrativepayslittle attention tothe individuallength of different items,as is partic ularly apparent in the kinglists, where long and short descrip tionsfollow oneanother, bynecessity, inan irregularorder.Yet, byvirtueofthisveryirregularity, a' complex'action,whentoldas a series of individual items, will show emphasis at different points, among which the beginning and end tend to stand out. We have seen this principle operate in the list of thb earliest Egyptiankings. Herodotus(itwouldseem)deriveditfromearlier ethnographic and historical writing rather than directly from Homer,itsultimatesource.Inhisownethnographicsections,and insomeof thesmallerhistoricalunits, thebeginning is.theplace of principal emphasis. Theethnographic sections added tothe first capture of Babylon may serve as an example (1.178ff.). Thefirstofthesebeginswithanintroductory statementthatamong thecitiesofAssyriaBabylonisthemostillustriousandhasbeenthe capitalsincethedestructionofNineveh(1.178,1).Thesubsequent descriptionofthecityisfollowedbyahistoricalsectionintroduced bya parallelstatement (amongtherulers ofBabylon twoqueens
*Ch.I,2627. Cf.alsovan Groningen,Comp.litt.53.

(7.210.2) Oragain:
(The Persians) chose to rule while living in an unpleasant country,rather than to be slaves while sowing on theplains. (9.122.4)18

Thesecondexampleis thelastsentenceof Herodotus'work. The relative lack of antithesis is surprising in an author in whose thought oppsites play an important part. Antithetical relations are thus commonly expressed in nonantithetical ways by Herodotus,This"inner antithesis,"asI wouldlike to callit, pervades the work in the explicit and implicit comparisons of nations, especially^of Greeks and Persins and, in Greece, of Athenians and Spartans. It is even more important in the con trasting pictures of monarchs, and in changes of fortune of
" TheHippocraticessay On Airs,Waters,Places, Chs.12 and16,stresses thedif ferencerather thanthecomparison. On thesectionon TheEndsof theWorld,seefurther Chs.Ill,102103 and IV,172. Additionstologoi>e.g.1.140(addednotetologosonPersiancustoms,concerning burial).Argument: e.g. 1.5.3 (Herodotus' opinion contrasted with thatof Persians andPhoenicians): Comparisonof customs:e.g.1.56.2 (Pelasgiansand Dorians) and 2.35.2ff. (Egyptiansandthe restof mankind). " Onoxymoron inHerodotus,secSchmidSthlin l.2.653,'notc3.

52

FORM ANDTHOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

OH. II.STYLEAND STRUCTURE

53'

are outstanding, 1.184)." Later on, thesection on customs is if oo, ^ ^ stressing Herodotus' selectivity (1.192.1: on the resources of Babylon), foUowed by still other introductorystatements (1.193.1;194.1; 195.1*;196.1). Itappears, however,that.in thehistoricalnirativeHerodotus tends to emphasize,the end of a unit more than its beginning. K.oughIyspeaking,thefollowingtypesoffinalstatementarefound : (I) Theemphaticpresentation ofthelaststageofan action,asin thejustlyfamoussentencethatservesastheconclusionoftheAtvs
^

story;^^

'

Adrastus, the'son of Gordias, theson of Midashe who had bqcome themurderer ofhis brother,and themurderer ofhim who had cleansed himwhen thetomb had beendeserted by the people, slew himself over it in the knowledge that of all humansheknew hewasthemost unfortunate. (1.45.3) (2) Asummaryof theaction,,orofaijaspect ofit:^ Thus ~the Mermndae acquired the rule (of Lydia), havihg takenitfrom theHeradeidae. (1.14.1,aftertheGygesstory) (3) A statement by the authr about the significance of the paststory: With regard to the death of Cyrus, theaccount above is the mostcert^n^outof manythat arctold. (1.214.5) Everythingwasdoneby thedivine(inth,;stormsatArtemisium) thatthePersianforcesshould beequalwiththeGreekand not betoQmuchlarger. (8:13) (4) A tagshowingthat theaction iscompleted Thisiswhat thePersianssayhappened. (1.5.1)
" Anotherparallel tothesepassagesoccursinternally, 1.185.1. **,It is true that thesentence continues into 146 * FrnV#.!

and

'

j oyi

The style of these remarks variesfrom case to case, but they haveincommontheideaofgivingasummary,howeverincomplete. It must be admitted that some accounts do not have such a concluding section,and'thateveri\vherewedofind one,it often referstoonlyapart(usually thelstpart) oftheprecedingchain. Nevertheless, thesestatementsareiiportantin turningthework froman amorphousmass into"anorganizedwhole. Emphaticstatements of the kind described above.lend them selves torepetition. Repetition,itis true,sometimesoccurs within the narrative in an irregular manner, but usually it has a tendency to mark a.rest or stop. In historical narrative, it'is particularlyimportantintheformofantidpationat thebeginning of a chain. Hence, at the beginning of a logos, introductory statements may correspond to the types of summarystatements attheend.2'However,thesummaryofthefirststageoftheaction is less common in the historical sections, and is sometimes less strongly worded, than thesummary'at theend;instead wefind often a brief announcement or anticipation of the conclusion. Several variatiQns of this short form of introduction also^occur: abriefstatementmaydealwiththeintentionofthemainactorof the story, or his basic motivation; or Herodotus, speaking for himself,maydeclarenopinionaboutthesequelofthenarrative, orhisown purposeintelling thestory.Thislasttype,whichis of course notfound atthe end ofa logoSj hasaconnectionwith the standard topicsof proems and will bediscussed later.Caution is againneeded inanalyzingthesestatements,sincefrequently they areevenless mandatoryorcomplete thanstatementsattheend. The beginning of a logos is often more vague thanits end :this has caused some confusion in the intekpretation of the work, since the modern reader expects rather the re<rerse. We will understand the beginning of a logos better if we think ofit asa placein which a partof thecondng storyis anticipated, rather thanasaclear announcementofwhat is.tocome.
VanGroningen,Comp.litt.91ff.Seeabobelow,notes26,38,and39. *Anticipation alsobeusedinternally:seevanGroningen,Cmplitt.93,who connectsitwithepicforeshadowing. _ j i j Introductorystatements may beclassified"in a mannersimilar to concluding statements;(1) Theemphaticpresentationofthefirst stageoftheaction,butusually weaker than theemphatic presentationof theend ofan action.This typeis more commonfor description thanfor actionproper. (2) The briefannouncement ofthe action, a form preferred to (1). (3) Anticipation of the conclusion. (4) A general statementaboutthesignificanceofwhatfollows.(5) Atag.

3.75.3,3.125.4. Itis from'sentencessuch asthese that Regenbogenhas denied hx nromeninn'H^otm{Werk 6566 [Marg,Herodot 6667]). For a morejudicious view,seeJ. D.Denniston,Greek ProseStyle (Oxford1952) 58 Sr* (2) i.perhapsfte

'diof

" Oftenemployed mechanicaUy toshow that.astoryisfinished ec482'rr coiWv<m),or2.135.6 (Ihavefinished withRhodopis). ^

54

FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODTUS

OH. II.STYLE AND STRUCTURE

55

The combination offinal and anticipatory statements has re ceived much attention under the name ofring composition,^^ a construction that resultsfrom a close (but not necessarily exact) correspondence betwe,en anticipatory and summary statements. Foran example,^wemay returnto theaccountoftheends ofthe worldin Hdt3.106.1116.3,I recallthe beginning: Theendsof'theworld possess themostbeautiful things,justas Greccepossesses seasonsmost beautifullymixed. (3.106.1) This sentence introduces an account of the riches of the four corners f the earth, in which the South is treated more fully, while East, West, and North are treated muchmore briefly. In theaccountoftheSouth,the mainstories"concern thedifficulties encounteredby theArabiansincollectingspicesandincensejthis leadsatonepointtoadisquisitionondivineprovidence.However the closing sentence iswritten as if a complete account.had precededdealing.equally withthefour endsoftheworld: The ends of the world, which enclose tlie regt and liold it withm, appear to possess what seems to us themost beautiful and therarest.(3.116.3)29 Thetwosummarystatements thusdo notexacysummarize the contentsofthelogos,since theydonotincludetheimportantidea of the difficulty of acquiring precious goods. They also do not exactly correspond to each other, since the second sentence no lonprexpressestheideaofacomparisonoftheendsofthe.world with,thp center, but instead adds the'concept ofthe rarity of beautiful things."The lack ofexact correspondenceis duefirst ofall toa general principleof variation,whichenablesHerodotus topresent hisownideas moreeasilyunder theguiseofinferences
theterm and bibliography in vanOtterlo, Ringkomposition 13U33. Vorfahren bei den attischen Rednern und Q \ ^ Iliasstudien, ASGW 43,No. 6 (lyj)84{Homer);vanOtterlo (above.Introduction,note24) reviewedbv Mettp C23 (1951) 223,J.A.Notopoulos. TAPA82{1951) 81 iv.mgkomposition im ersten Buche des.Thukydides," WS 70 fl957 17996* Groningen,Com^.lUt. 52f.Frnkel,DichtungundPhilosophie, index,594(Schleifengang): A. Lky, DuTragische Dichtung der Hellenen (Gttingen 1956) 92.Ring composition should not beconfused with circular,or (as Myres, Herodotus81 fF., calbit) "pedi mental composition,which ismore regularandnot basedon verbalrepetition. Cf. confusedin C.Whitman, Homer and the HeroK Tradition(Cambridge [Mass.]1958) 25254. " Forthestructureofthelogos,seeCh.III,102,and note75.

arisingnaturallyoutofthe materialitself.Secondly,itisduetoa closeconnectionof thesecondsentence withthe partofthe story that immediately precedes,inwhich therarityoffine thingsand theidea of theends ofthe whole world arestressed.Since Greece does not play a part in the logos, the second statement is more accurate than thefirst. Thereare many'Xamples toshow thatin socalled ringcom position the correspondnce between initial a'ndfinal statements isnotexact, butpurposelyvaried.Exactverbalrepetition ismore germaneto thestyleofthe epic,where ringcompositionwasfirst developed. It is consciously avoided by'Herodotus, who at times even shuns the repetition of the main featureof astory in favor of some detail.'Hence the term ring composition (which implies the idea of perfection) is misleading when used for the approximatecorrespondence of themarginsof narrativewithout reference tothe centerof thatnarrative. However, Iknow ofno betterterm.^ Inagood manycases, thestatementsatthe beginningand the end, while referring to the same events, do not.use the same phrasing,so thatthey aresomewhathard torecognize. Thusthe logos of the Origins of the Persians andof Cyrus,jnentioned in ChapterI, beginswith thewellkno.wn statement: At this point myargument inquires who this Cyrus was who destroyed the empire of Croesus, and in what manner the Persinscameto ruleoverAsia. (1.95.1) At theend ofthestory thetwo^ mainide'asfound in^this sentence (Cyrus'origins and^Persia'sruleover Asia) can.bediscovered in thefollowingseries ofremarks: AtthattimethePersiansandCyrusrevoltedagainst theMedes underAstyages, andruled from thenon overAsia. Cyruskept Astyages with him until he died, without harming him any further.Cyrus,being thusbori^and reared,cameto thethrone andlater onconquered Croesus, whohad begunthe injustice, as I have said before. Havingsubdued him he thus came to ruleoverall ofAsia. (1.130.23)
Seetheexampleslistedinvan Otterlo,Ringkomposition149ff. (recapitulationin theformof ringcomposition),andin Pohlenz,Herodot 63. Cf.however theGerman term"Schleifengang."See alsothe criticism byvan Groningen,Comp.litt.52f. > Ch.1,21.

56

FORMAND THOUQHTIN HERODOTUS

CH.II. STYLE AND STRUCTURE

57

Here^he.firn and third of the sentences cijedsummarize the preceding, narratiye, thefirst referring to the revolt of Cyrus Medes(i.e. theimmediatelyprecedingnarrative), the tiurd bothto the miraculousoriginofCyrus,(i.e. thefirst partof theprecedingnarrative)andtotheCroesusLogos,whichitattempts to tie in here. Because of this last aside, the.statement of the introductory,sentencein1.95,"inwhatmannerthePersianscame toruleoverAsia,"isrepeatedtwicein1.130,thesecond timewith merecedemphasisC'aliofAsia"),sincetheunificationofEastern andWesternAsi^wasachievedthroughthevictpry overCroesus. Xhistype ofsummarystatement bringsus toanother,inwhich thestatements at^the.beginningand end refe to quite different aspectsofthe.narrative.Thestoryofthedeath of Polycrates the tyrantofSamos, isintroducedas follows: AtaboutthetimeofCambyses'illness thefollowinghappened. Oroetas,aPersian,hadbeenestablishedatSrdisbyCambyses. Thismandesired anunholy deed... (3.120.1) After themurderofPolycrates byOroetas, weread: Polycrates'greatluck thuscameto pchanend,as Amasis'the kingof Egypt hadforetold, but not muchlater vengeance for PolycratesovertookOroetas also.(3.125.4^126.!) Here thefinal. sentence falls into^two parts, thefirst of which summarizes the precedinglogos, while thesecond announces the following narrative. Thesummary concerns specificaUy the end of the Polycrates stof^; >ul it also ffrs totiie much earher accoutofthefriendshipofPolycratesandAmasis (3.40)'.34Thus thereadermustdeducetheunityofthedifferentaccountsfromthe
storyItself.

Histories,andithas givenrise tothetheorythat Herodotuswrote

those partslater, when hehdfinally developed asense for true historical narrative. The truth is, however, that the acconts of the Persian Wars do not require such elaborate punctuation. Whereverthematerialoflaterbooks becomesmoredigressive,we find again the method of summarystatements.'Herodotus' style thusadaptsitself tothsubject matter.' VanOtterlodistinguishestwo typesofringcompsition,onein whichthesentenesthatframealogos refer^tothn'frativeWhich they contain,and theother in which theframingseiltences take up the broken thread of a narrative interrupted by a digression onmattersunrelated toit.Thesecondtype,(theanaphoraofan interruptedidea,ornarrativ)canbeexemplified bytherepeated statementsthatCyrus,defeatedCroesus,oneexampleof^hichwe have just cited. These statements, repeated thrice,over, are designed to connect the st9ry of Cyrus' origins with hisfirst and later campaigns.' In itsfirst occurrence the statement summarizes the preceding account; throughfurtier repetition i^ comes to be anaphoric. In general, anaphoric statements'are simplyrepetitionsof regularframingsentences^ofthefirst type.If wedescribe theregular typeasfollows: aIa_bIIb_cIIIc,etc., where I,II, IIIstandfor different logoi,^ and a, b,c,for frammg sentences, then the, socalled anaphoric type may bp^aji^yzed as foUows: aIa_bIIb_aHIa,etc. ' Hence^ the distinction between the two types is unnecessary. Anaphoric ring composition is merely an example of repetition carried out more than once.Such continuous repetition, termed "refrain composition" by van Otterlo, enables Herodotus to carrycertainkeythemesorideasthiroughalargepartofthework,
Agreatdifferenceinstylebetweenthefirst andthesecond partsof thework is assumed byAly, VolksmTckm297 ff.;cf. also Aly,Formprobleme 63, andJacoby,RE Suppl.2.353. Butstatistical attemptsto definethe differencehave led to no'certain results:SchmidSthlin 1.2.594,note 8 (atticbms),'2indvan Otterlo, Ringkmposition 153ff.Cf.alsoJacoby,RESuppl.2.489, lines30if. Notethe useof framingsentences in thebattle descriptionsof Salamis, Flataea, andMycale, Ch.VI,270,andnotes 155and177. 'Van Otterlo, Ringkomposition 137. This terminology is also criticized by van Groningeii,Comp.lilt.5253.Thetermsareinklusorisckand anaphorisch. "Hdt.1.92.1;1.94.7;1.130.3;1.141.1.

Asa varietyof thistype, wertiay nt'e thosestories whereonly the beginning of the following action is announced. Whereas subsequent actionsare appended'withoutany furtherannounce ment. This is especially common in the latter parts of the
final'rft inconsistencyin Herodotus' finin fi,' ^ V "T^ere isno inconsistency,however, ifwe considertheaonst to'beingressive( c f . C a u s a l i o n 259,note31). notbo tencewhich mentionsAmasis'predictionshould ?31293^ w; li ofthesametechniqueistheDemocedesstory whehlfL? sentences, each of hichrefers toadifferentevent, andyet theoveraUstructureis quiteclear.

58

FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH.II. STYLE AND STRUCTURE

59

and has been fundamental to Pohlenz' study of the Histories. Since we derive'ring composition in its simple form also from repetition,we donot need an elaborateterminology for multiple repetition. Moreimportant than,anaphoricconnectionsare thecombina tionsa^b,b_c;etc.,shown inthefirst ofthediagramsabove,for itis here thatdifferent logoi arejoined together by means of the wellkno\Yn mende sentences so common in Herodotus, Some times tlie^connectionis purelymechanical:
The Delphians, on the onehand {rnen d"), inaccordance with the oracle, pray to theWinds to this day, but {de) the naval armamentofJ^rxes startedfrom Therma...(7.179)

.in It is by a simple system of external repetition between semi autonomouspartsof hisnarrative (andto 'a lesserextent bysome internal repetition as well) that Herodotus has" created a large unified work. Throughout this work descriptionsofsingle events reach out tofind connections with other events, especially at the beginning and end of astory.Thus HerodotuS'style every where exhibits the singl chain rather than omplex inter weaving. Subsidiary action tends to beattached td theprimary chainat asingle point,of atleast at one of a'restrictednumber of points. The most precise attachment in Herodotus is the synchronism. Even where a synchronism is made with an ex tended series of events, it is often treatedas asynchronismwith asingle pointin time.^In thesame manner,ethnographic areattached to the single moment, as it were, of conquest,and Greeklogoi, toprecise pointsof contactbetweenEastand West.^^ Some accounts, it is true, contain aseries ofsynchronismswith themainaction,butsuchlogoicanusuallybe,analyzedasseparate sections, each depending on its ownSynchronism. Conspicuous, examples of this more complex method are the.Spartan War against Polycratesof Samosand theGreek Preparations Logosin Book 7.^2 Thus, on the whole, the term "parallel action" should not be applied to the work of Hero4otus.^ Elaborate parallel
Syijchronisms arediscussedin detail by.F.W. Mitchel, An Investigation of the Chronological Systemsused by Herodotus (unpublished Yale Diss. 1954);cf. also Mitchel inPhoenix 10(l956) 4869,andH.Strasburger,"Herodots Zeitrechnung,"inMarg, Herodot677725,arevisedversionthatsupersedesthepapermHistoria5(1956)12961. " Ch.I,3435. " Ch.III,9899and1337. Herodotususes"meanwhile" ( S) mainly to connect asingleaction with a precedingstate of affairs. Powell, Lexicon s.v. s B III 4, lists 17 examples of this expression, ofwhich onlythree introducelogoi: 3.74.1 (whilethe sevenconspirators deliberate, Prexaspeshurls himselffroma tower);5.108.1 (Introductionto Qypriote Campaign in IonianRevolt); 7.26.1 (Beginningof Xerxes' March).For thesethree logoi, see Ch. III, 110, 115, and 129. Other places where I have noted parallel action are:a part of the Scythian Campaign (Ch. III, 110), a portion of the accountof Plataea (9.54f.),and thebeginning of theBabylonian Revolt (3.150,cf. Jacoby,RESuppl.2.306). Onthewhole, bothJacobyand Pohlenzmake^too much of parallel action in Herodotus. Parallel accounts in Homer: W. Schadewaldt, Iliasstudien (above, note 28) 93, 97 f., etc. Basic is T. Zieliriski, Philologus,Suppl. 8,407ff. Cf. D.L. Page,The HomericOdyss^ (Oxford 1955) 64 f.and 77, note 11. SeealsoS.E.'Bassett,The Poetryof Homer (Berkeley1938) 34AT. Iwouldurge,against BassettandPage,thatitiserroneoustoconsideronlythequestionoftimesequencein

Thefirst part'ofthissentencedoss thestoryof theoracle which the Delphians received'concerning the winds, a.story which in turn closes the great account of the Greek preparations against thePersians. Initssecond part,thesentenceinitiates theaccount f theftibvement' of'Xerxes'fleet into Greece^ Of^en, however, mende sentences are not used so mechanically; but help greatly intheunderstandingofHerodotus'mainideas.Itisnottoo much tosay thatthis typeofconnectionfurnishes thebasicstructureof thework; manyexamples will becited in thenext chapter.
*Van Otterlo, Ringkomposition 162, has named this type of ring composition Ritomellkomposition)cf. alsohis paperin Mnmo^e, ser.3,12(1945) 192207 Similar aresomeoftherepeatedthemesstressed by'Pohlenz,Herodot 9F. ("DasLeitmotif"). Theidea ofRahmenerzhlungalso'owessomethingtothisphenomenon(cf.Introduction note 29). Repeated framing sentences of this type may be either simply factual portionsofalogos (e.g.mtheSpartanWaragainstPolycrates,Ch.III, 9899,orinthe antecedentiofSalamis,Ch.VI,270),orthey maystresscertainthemesof importance for thework asa whole (e.g.below, note59). Similarrepetitions alsooccurintern allywithinlogoi,andsometimesatgreatintervals;thussomemetaphysicalstatements recurmtheSolonCroesusstory, thePoiycratesAmasisstory,and theXerxesadviser scenes;cf.Samicn Stories31819.antemalrepetition maybeconfined toasinglelogos: cf.e.g.therepeated referencestotheconquestsofUpperAsia bytheMedes,1.102.2; 103.2; 104.2; 105.1; the wording varies throughout. Ir^temal repetition does not^ however,establish unitsofnarrative, andis thereforelittlestressedin thisstudy.Yet itmust beadmittedthat thedistinctionissometimes ratherarbitrary. Frnkel, Stileigenheit 83. Van Otterlo, Ringkomposition 171 fF. Thefirstpart commonly usesthe particles^V, Sij. or wv.Thistypeofsentencealsooccura internally,e.g.in thestoryof therapeof Io(1.1.4):"Ontheonehand {^v8^) the majorityof thewomenescaped, but (8) Ioandothers wereseized,"wherethefiv clausedisposesofapartof thestorybeforeHerodotusturnstothe mainevent.Some connectingsentences'haveonlythesecond,or8^portion,.g5.82.1(thebeginningof the story of the old hostility between Athens and Aegina, taking up the idea ex pressed m5.81.2);cf.also1.34.1 (beginningoftlie Atysstory)and8.65.1 (beginning ofthe DicaeusandDemaratusstory).

60

FORICI ANDTHOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

CH.n.STYLE AND STRUCTURE

61

compositions such as arefound in Homer are basically alien to him. Semingexceptions,canusually beexplaineddifferently.Inthe middleoftheaccountoftheIonian Revolt,erodotusturnsfrom the description of.certainactions of Darius toa new logosof the campaignin Cyprus,which took placeduring the IonianRevolt and wasrelatedjto it.Theintroductorystatementis asfollows:
While{enhoide) thenews,abo.utSardis hadcome to the King, and Darius^liad shot his arrow and had spoken to Histiaeus, andHistiaeus,having beenreleased byDarius,wastravelingto die'coast, ii thiswhole period there happened the following. (5.108.1)

Hereweseemtohavetwo stretchesoftime correlated,butactually th time intervals are not*measured at ll, and thefirst part of thesentence simplysummarizes one by one the preceding three storiesof Herodotus'ownnarrative(5.105107).At theendofthe Cypriote Campaign there is no further reference to.the events summarizedin'theintroductorysentence,,andthus thatsentence looks forward perhaps only to the beginning of the Cypriote Revolt.Likewise,inBook 3,the.deathof Prexaspesis attached to the actions of the seven conspirators against the Magiwith^the followingwords: '
Whilethese(theSeven)were thusdeliberating,thereHappened bycoincidencethefollowing...(3.74.1) ^

on thesingle chainof events, with"singjeiattachments ofsmaller accounts,rather thanonelaborate synchronousstructures. The irregular sequenc of emjjhatic and less emphatic state ments produces anarrative thaimaybe.called rhythmic. Thereis no clearcut subordination; instead.repetition,,anticipation, and sumniary create units"of unequal length. These,in turn form a chain,with certaininterruptionsattached atdefinite points. Itis well not to apply to these latjer the term digression, since it is frequentlyimpossibletosay whetherthedigressionismore,orless important than the main narrative.^ From the.purely formal point of view, we can make distinction between,smaller and larger units, and sometimes wefind the.smaller units inserted withintheframeworkoflargerones.Thegeneralprincipleofcom position here is that the place between logoi forms.a pause.'Thus a possible placefor shortremarks, oreven shortstories,.is between thetwo p^rtsof aconnectingsentence ofthe mende type.Si^ch a sentence occurs between Darius' .questioning of Greks .and Indian^ about their burial customsand theSpartanw^r,against Polycrates : ^
Such,then {men nyri),are thee customs,// and Pindarappears tometo'havebeenpghtinsayingthatLawiskingofall,// b\it {de) whil Cambyses'had beenfighting against gypt, the Lacedaemonians had also waged a war against Samos ^d Polycrates. ..(3.38.439.1) *

ThestorywhichfollowsimmediatlyuponthisconcernsPrexaspes and hisrelations withthe Magi;andit endswithhis death. Now obviously the death alone, and not the whole narrative, is con temporaneous with the conspirators' deliberations.^^ In several instanceswherewe expect parallelaction,it doesnot occur,such asfor thesynchronism between Croesus'andCyrus' reigns,orthe parallelism between the battles of Salamis and Himera, or that between Plataea and Mycale. In all these bases; the connection is made ata single^point. Onthe whole,the Historiesare based
parallelaccounts ;Homerseemstome'toworkthroughoutviathvery elaborateanalogi calcompositions(e.g.suitorsandTelemachusscenesin theOdyssey.).ThisHerodotus doesnotdo. ' **Cf. 3.76.2, where the conspirators hear of Preicaspes' death "on th road." Thisconstitutesan additionalsynchrnism,a procedurebasically related toproems ofthesecond typediscussed below,65ff. Theparallelism of the battlescite'd aboveis noted by"Herodotuso'niy in one passageineachc^ejseeHdt.7.166.1,andCh.VI, 257.(Thesynchronismin 9.90.1 merelyanticipates9.100101).

Theremarkabout Pindarisanoteplaced betweenthe.twoparts ofa single connectingsentence.^' Thesame.phehomenoii.occurs onalargerscaleinthemonstersentencewhichconnectstheearly achievementsof Croesuswith thevisitof Solon tO'Sardis:there a statement about Croesus' conquests,of barbarians,with a listof subject peoples,is placedin the middle of the connecting state ment.^ The same principleisfinally used to place whole logoi between the main sections of the narrative. In this manner, the
See thecomments onthe study by Erbsecited above, Introuction, note34. Erbse distinguishesamong others three principal typesof digression:.(1) thosefur nbhing geographical background, (2) those introducing a new character, and (3) metaphysicalexplanations., , , Similarly2.31 (thecontinuation is made with AAc); 3.105.2 (last sentence); 4.63;7.131. In3.138.4thefinalstatementabout.^thesignificanceoftheprecedinglogos isplaced inthemiddleof aconnectingsentence. , CkI,note43.

62

FORM ND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

GH. n.STYLE AND STRUCTURE IV

63

accounts of Cros\is' dedications and the marvels of Lydia are placed betweenthe Croesus Logosand thelgos on theorigins of Persia, and the logoPon Persian customs'isinterpolated between the origins of Persia and the accounts of Gyrus' campaigns.^ Itfollows that'suchsmall notesor logoi areuseful indetermining the main groups of logoi irl thework, and thatin determining a break between major logoi we must make it where Herodotus shows us a i^ause, whether or not this corresponds to our own ribtions oftheunity ofsubject matter. Thenotion ofa pauseisalsousefulin studyingthebeginnings andendsof unitsnot otherwiseclearlymarked byanticipatoryor concludingstateihents. Both the Egyptian and Scythian ethno graphiclogoi lacksuchstatements (althoughthere isih each case anaphora of the surrounding narrative), and instead they each begin with an anecdote. The Egyptian'account begins'with the storyofthe hnguisticexperimentof KingPsammetichus, through which he discovered that the Egyptians were not the earliest of mankind, and the Scythian begins with the'story of the war between the Scythians and their slaves, in which the theme of freedom and slavery is prefigured. Similar anecdotes also occur attheend ofsomelogoi, sucjias thestory, already mentioned,of theDelphic oi^acle concerning,,th winds,a story whichcomes at the end of the logos on Greek preparations. In certain logoi, Herodotus enters slowly upon his subject and shows a certain reluctance,asitwere,toleaveit.Asignificantdevelopmentofthis stylistic peculietrity is the fact that. Herodotus sometimes puts personal remarks and accounts of'great theoretical importance between logoi dealing with concrete events, so that the former takeon theshapeof "digressions."
**Hdt.1.9294and1.13140.Inboth casestheframingsentenceisrepeated after thelgos. i Cf.above, note46.Similar introductoryanecdotesoccur e.g.in theEuropean Campaign Logos{Ch. III,110) and in theaccounj of Plataea (Ch. VI,note 170). Anecdotesattheendofa/o^oj:seetheLibyanEthnographicLogos (Ch.III,113),the Scythian(Ch. IJI,107),Darius'inquiry intoburialcustomsat theend of theCam byses logoi (3.38)."Digressions" of theoreticalimportance: 2.5153, on Greek and Pelasgianreligion, partofaseriesoflogoi onEgyptian andGreek religion,divination and festivak, and placed between the sections on Egyptian sacrifices and sacred animals (Ch. III,96); 3.108109, on divine providence in the animal kingdom, placed at'theend ofthestory ofthe collectionof incenseby theArabians (Ch.III, 102);4.36.245.5,discussion ofthegeography of theworld,placed afterthestoryof theHyperboreans,which closesthe geographical part of theScythian Ethnographic Logos.

The proem is one further device by which emphasis can be placed at certain specific points in thechain of logoi. As suchit always has a strong connection with the narrative immediately following,sothatitinever acompletesurveyofwhatis tocome, but merelyinitiates insome waya sequence, tKe end ofwhich is usu^y not indicated. The proem is simply a more elaborate form of theinitial statement by anticipation.This is true, as we have seen, of the proem at^ the beginning of the work, which initiates the work without foretelling its future"course.^ At the same time, the external proem (i.e. the proem at the beginning ofa work) makes useof anumber ofstandard topics,suchasthe nameof theauthor (andlater on,but notin Herodotus,a title), theauthor'sjustificationfor makinghiswork public,his purposes and methods, and an indication of the importance of the work, orofits subject.This last topicis notfully treated byHerodotus inthe externalproem ofthe work. Internalproems may bedefined asstatementswithin thework which introduce not merely asingle logos, but moregenerally a latgersection ofmaterial,orasstatementscallingattentiontothe importance of a logos in more general terms than do simple anticipatory sttements. Such proems are not very common in Herodotus, andsofar as Icansee thereisnotalwaysanecessary correlation between their occurrence and the importance of the followingnarrative. Hence internal'proems'areonlya secondary devicein thestructureofthe workas awhole. Internal proems fall into two.classes : thefirst uses the topics of theexternal proem (it speaksof the author's qualifications or praises the topic that folloy/s), while the second uses the topics commonfor introductorystatements in afuller, or morecompli cated, form. These two types do not appear to be combined in Herodotus. Thefirst appears in the wellknown comparison of Xerxes' invasion'withfour previous campaigns between Europe andAsia (atthe beginningofBook 7),which issometimescalled thesecond proemof thework.^ Despitethefact thatthis proem is introduced by gar as an explanation, its topics are those of external proems: the comparison [synkrisis) of the coming cam paign)vithearlierones,and theauxesisof thecampaignby listing
" Ch.I,18. Hdt.7.2021.SeeCh.III,129.

64

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. n.STYLE AND STRUCTURE

65

the size of the armament; thus Herodotus adapts thestandard topic of the praise of subject to the immediate surroundings, whileintroducing thesection on preparations. Other conspicuous examples of the use of topics properly belonging to theexternal'proem occurin theethnographic logoi. In the Egyptian ethnographicaiccount such proemialstatements furnish the basic'internal structure of the logos. We have seen earher that this l'gos starts without an introductory sentence; instead itis introduced by thestory of Psammetichus' hnguistic experiment, which deals with the idea of the antiquity of the 'Egyptians. To this story are dded some remarks'on sources: Herodotusheardthis'andotherstoriesfrom^thepriestsinMmphis, Thebesand Hehupolis,and thushis accountis basedon thebest nativeinformants (2.23). All thisis introductory tothe descrip tionofthecountryofEgypt (thecAr^),whichis*thefirit Standard topicof ethnographietogi.Atthe beginning'of thenxtsection, thedescription ofcustoms {nomoi)^ we'read: < I am about to lengthen the'logos about Egypt because''(this country) contains the mst marvels and has works beyond descriptionas compared with othercountries; therefore, more willbesaid aboutit. (2.35.1) Thisintroduction cannot betaken atfacevalue,because anomoi sectionismandatoryinethnography.Thestatementisaninternal proem using,thetopic of praise of subject matter. Therefollow twosections on Egyptian history. Thefirst is introduced as follows: r Up to this point my account has beenbased on my 'own observation, opinin, and investigation,'but from now*on I shall tell the stories giveh by the Egyptians as I have heard them;abitof peVsonalobservation willbe included. (2.99.1) Again, the statement dbfes not mention the subject matter that follows, but uses the topic of the,reUabihtypf spurces :history is not basedon directobservation, buton praaccounts. A similar proemial statement introduces the more recent histoiyof Egypt: The (above) is what the Egyptians'themselves say, but what boththe restofmankind and theEgyptiansagree indeclaring
Onthesesections,see Ch.III,97and99. ^

to have happened in this country, ht I shall now relate; a bitofpersonal observationwill beincluded. (2.147.1) Herodotushasdivided thehistoryof Egyptintotwo periods :that beforethearrivalof theGreeksinEgyptintheseventhcenturyis based on Egyptian accounts alone/ while the f)eriod after the GreekshadcometoknowEgypt (thehistoryoftheSaitedynasty) wasbetterknown,sinceEgyptianaccounts.co^ldnow bechecked against Greekaccounts (thephrase"therestof mankind"inthe quotation above refers primarily to the Greeks). Consequently, he has used the topic of the reliabi'lity of Sources for proemial introductions to both sections, each written with the other in mind, especially as regards the mention f his own personal observation (i.e. the use of monuments in each section to sub stantiate Egyptian history).^ We notice, then, that the passage at the beginning of the Egyptian Logos, which also deals with sources,isproemialaswell,although,somewhatinthemanner of the socalled second proem in Book 7, it is in form merely an additionto thepreceding narrative. Otherethnographic logoi lack thecompleteness of thisscheme, butwe maycitetwo isolatedinstances fromtheScythian Ethno graphicLogos: But I laugh whenIsee thosewho havewritten surveysof the earth in great number, without giving sensible explanations. (4.36.2) Thisintroduces a section on Herodotus' ideas about the mapof theworld. Alittlefurtheron, asimilar statement.occurs: Imarvelatthosewhohave definedandseparated Libya,Asia, andEurope. (4.42^1) Both, proemial sj^temen,ts recall the proem of Hecataeus'
Genealogies.^^

Thesecondclassof proepisowesitscharacterto acombination offramingsentences, for itis possiblefor certainstatements and their repeatedcounterpartsto overlapinsuch away thatseveral
Onthe topicsusedin'prom's, seebelow. Ch.III,note3, andfor theschemes used in ethnographic logoi,'see this Chapter, note 60. A similar phrase on sources occurse.g.in 4.150.1,and asimilarphrase onpurposein 1.177;3.60.1and 4. Jacoby,FGrH I, 31819 (1 F1). Hdt.4.42.rintroduces aseparatesection.A furtherexampleofaproemof iefirst typeis4.46.

66

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

OH. n.STYLE ANDSTRUCTURE

67

come togetherat gne point. This may be represented in the followingdiagram:

aI.. bII.. cIII. .

c+b + a.
V'

campaign (6.119).This type of proem, then,is no more than a combination of features found elsewhere in individual framing sentences.

Or, if the combined statements are anticipatory rather than summary: >
a+b+ c
1 1

cI.. bII.. aIII...

We have already seen an example of thefirst alternative in the introduction to'the Cypriote Revolt. Thefirst and second alternativesboth,appearinwhat Iwouldlike tocalltheproem to thelogoson Marathon :
TheAthenianshadjoined inwarwith theAeginetans,and the Persian was carrying out his own plans, for the servant was reminding him constantly of the Atjienians,the.Peisistratids .were uging him on and accusing the Athenians, and at the same time Darius himself desired to use this pretextfor.the conquestofthosein Greecewhowould notgive himearthand water. Mardonius, who had done poorly on his (previous) expedition, he dismissed from the command, and appointing othergeneralshesentthemagainstEretriaandAthens, namely Datis, a Medeby birth, and Artaphemesson of Artaphernes, his own nephew. In sending them he told them to enslave AthensandEretriaand tobringtheslavesbefore him. (6.94)

In this elaborate statement, the first sentence summarizes: the slave'sreminder refersto achapterin theIonian Revolt (5.105), the Peisistratid entreaties recall the end of thesecond Athenian logos (5.96.1), and the demand for earth and water harks back to the beginning of the Aeginetan Logos (6.48.2). The whole is introduced'byastatementsummarizingtheendof theAeginetan Logos,i.e. thechapter immediately preceding (6.93). Except for thislast,allsummarystatementsarecombined,inacausalscheme accordingto whichvengeanceand provocationare minorcauses when comparedwith expansionist desire.' The second portion of the chapter looks forward and closes with an anticipatory statement which is fulfilled for the Eretrians at the end of the
" Above,60.Asimilarsummary,Hdt.3.140.1. Causation27273.

If in thepreceding pages \ye have paid a perhaps inordinate amount of attentionto th,e mechanicalconnection between logoiy this is because these connections are most easily classified and therefore have been studied more fully than other aspects of structurein Herodotus.^ In turning now toindividual logoi,we shallfind that theirinternalstructurelikewise fallsinto patterns, whichare, however,less easilyidentified.Thisis truedespite the fact that internal unity is in large measure based on the same principles as external unity. A logos may bea chainofevents or a more balanced or dramatic composition, but its basis will always be parataxis modified by irregular emphasis, especially atthebeginningandend.AnessentialfeatureofHerodoteanstyle isthefact thatthe elementsofexternalconnectionare alsofound ininternalconstruction.Thuswehaveirregularemphasisthrough repetition,anticipation,andsummary,occurringwithin logoiand leadingtoasystem ofcross referencesand verbalechoes between different units of composition as well as within a single logos. Some of these connections will be pointed out in the next chapter. ' Itmaybeusefultodistinguishcertaintypesoflogoionthebasis of form and subject matter. There can be little question that definite arrangements of subject matter had already become associated with geography and ethnography before Herodotus, butitis lesscertain that'historicalsections werearegular partof such logoi.^^ However that may be, Herodotus gives his own complete scheme only in the Egyptian Ethnographic Logos in
Not all logoi employ ring composition for outer connection: e.g. the Gyges story (1.8.112.2) uses repetitionof participialphrases atthe beginning,cf. Frnkel, Stileigenheit65f;similarly,the Pigresstory,5.12.1ff. Directcross references:SchmidSthlin1.2.592, note8;Powell,Hist. Herodotus 8990. Verbal echoes: Pohlenz, Herodot 921 and 209; above, note 38. "Ritomell komposition"isrelated tothis. For ethnographic patterns see Trdinger, Studien 15ff., esp. 21; Jacoby, Entwicklung88ff.;E.Norden,DieGermanischeUrgeschichtein Tacitus'Germania (Leipzig 1922)46'ff.;Pohlenz,Herodotlff.; E.VVolff,Hermes69(1934)136ff.Forthequestion oftherelation betweenhistoricaland ethnographiclogoi,seeabove.Ch.I,note59.

68

FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. n.STYLE AND'STRUCTURE

69

Book 2;itconsists of.Origins,Descriptionof Country, Customs, and History, and the Customs section,is divided into Religious Customs and Secular Customs, in that order. In thesection on customsHerodotusreliesheavilyonthearchaic joiningoftheparts ofnarrative byintermediate links,a fact which tends toconfirm the traditional character of this kind of logos.^^ His other ethno graphic logoi'vary thisscheme, with some (such as the Libyan) preserving the traditional form to a considerable extent, while others (in particular'theScythian) modify it to conform to the particular historical situation with which they are connected.^ Certain other" s'hort /o^o, such as place descriptions, notes on natural histoiy, and, scientific arguments, likewise give the impressionof beingheavilyindebted toapreexistingtradition. ^ Amongthehistoricallogot,we havealreadynoted thechronicle of kings, which is used for long stretches of the narrative, but always in modified form. The most outstanding feature of the chronicleofking'isthe"seriesofcampaigns. Fortheir description Herodotus has afixed orderof topics,varied ofcourseaccording to circumstances, but ideally present in all logo). The complete schemeisasfollows;
1. Planof aggressor 2. His preparations. 3. Sectionon causation (ai/zesection). 4. Marchofaggressor to placeofaction. 5. Preparationsofdefender. 6. Marchofdefender to,placeofaction. 7. Battle., 8. Epilogue"; consequences of battle.(retreatand pursuit;stories aboutvictorsin valor;furtherpursuit ofenemy).

yithunderlying causes.^The.crucialstage is the battlesection, which is essentially a circular composition around some central point, not necessarily the miUfary decision, but sometimes anotherelement.Thefullformis asfollows:
1. Movementofaggressor intoposition. 2. Movementof defenderinto position. 3. Coimcilofdefender. 4. (Lesscommonly) acouncilfor theattacker.' 5. Descriptionofaction. 6. Epilogue,i.e. No.8above.

Thelastchapterwillshow examplesofthevarietyofcomposition possibleunderthis scheme,especilly inthe great'battlesagainst the Persians in 480 and 479. Itis characteristic of Herodotus that thesections preceding and following the action are always moreimportant'thatthe battleitself. Moredifficult (andperhapslessfruitfulfororpurposes) isthe analysisofthe minor typesof logoiinthe"vvork,t)ut thereareat leasttwotypesofhighlyorganizedlogoi, notdependent on subject matterandthusrecurringinvarioussituations.On'eisthedramatic logos and theother thecircular logos. Of these, theffmerclearly bears a relation to Attictragedy.'Its elements arethesameas thosefoundinother,nondramaticlogoi,buttheyarearrangedin suchfashion asto producea definite tragicdeveloprrient. In this group are found the most famous of Herodotus' compositions,
*Causation243ff. Oncausationin Herodotus,seenowalso R.Sealey,CQ_,n.s.7 (1957) 112,andA.E.Wardman, AJP82 (1961)13350. See.Ch.VI,passim. " Forpatternsofadvice,seebelow,74. Onwisdomliteratureconnectedwith the SevenSages (an importantmodel forHerodotus), seeBar^owski in RE,s.v.Sieben Weise; M.P. Nilsson, Gesch. d.griech. Rel.^ 1 (Munich 1955)"650f.; and B.Snell, Leben und Meinungen der Sieben Weisen' (Munich1952). Generally, Aly, Volksmrchen 15ff.and236ff. Literarypatternsoforacles:Crahay,Litt.orac.4657.Conversations: R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895) 242. Speeches: E. Schulz, Die Reden im Herodot (Diss. Gttingen 1933); A. Deffner, DitRede bei Herodot und ihre Weiterbildung bei Thukydides (Diss. Munich 1933). On the parables in the speeches of Socles and Leotychidas,secCh.Vf194 and213. For Herodotus and tragedy, see H. Fohl, Tragische Kunst bei Herodot (Diss. Rostock 1913); B. Snell, Aischylos und das Handeln im Dramer, Philologus,Suppl. 20, No.1 (1928) 72f.; Myres,Herodotus 27and 13738;F. W.Walbank,"History and Tragedy,"Historia9(I960)221ff. Unknowntome:J. Casseur,Hrodoteet lestragiques duV'sicU (ThseBrussels),cf.RBP 20(1942) 535.'Recently,D.L.Page,"'AnEarly TragedyontheFallofCroesus?"PCPS188(1962)47ff.OntherelationofHerodotus totheGygestragedy,a fragmentofwhichisknownfromapapyrus,seee.g.A.Lesky, HermesSi (1953) 1ff.

It should be noted, however, thata considerable amount of variation is possible within this scheme. The causation section always deals with the immediate grievances {aitiai),rather than
" FortheoutlineoftheEgyptian Ethnographiclogos,seeCh.III,9697. Seethecomparativetablesin Aly,FormprobUme48 ;Myres,Herodotus 73 : Pohlenz Herodot79ff. ' ' " Place descriptions: especially theshort ones arerib doubt in a form that is traditional, e.g. those iri Xerxes' march (7.30, etc.). Natural history: the phoenix sto^ISfromHecataeus(Jacoby,FGrHI, 1F324);cf.alsothe wingedsrlakes(3.107 109);thefoxants (3'.io2) and camel (3.103), etc.Scientific argument:sourcesand floodsoftheNileinBook 2;shapeofthecontinents(4.42.1)', etc.

70

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH. IL STYLE AND STRUCTURE

71

such as the Gyges story, the Atys story, the birth of Cyrus, the Periander and Lycophron story, and the death of Polycrates. On a larger scale, the whole Croesus Logos shows dramatic structure.IntheAtys'story, whichis oneof themostelaborate, themainsectionsaresetoffbyshortsummaryphrases,sothatthe analysis has an objective basis, The resultant structure is as follows : I. Introduction: a. Connecting sentence: punishment overtakes Croesus for hybrisin frontofSolon. b. Warningdream:sonwill bekilled. c. Croesusattemptstofoilthedreambyprotectinghisson. II. Adrastus:. a. Hisarrivaland cleansingby Croesus. b. Conversationof CroesusandAdrastus (in3 parts). III. Theboar: a. Heravages thecountry. b. Embassy to Croesus: request to get Atys to help; .negativereply. IV. Conversationof Atysand hisfather: a. Atysasksfor permissiontogo. b. Croesusexplains hisdram. c. Atysinterprets thedreamdifferently. .d. Croesusis persuaded. V. Adrastus: a. Croesusasks himto accompanyAtys. b. Adrastus is unwilling, but he isfinally convinced by Croesus. VI. TheHunt: a. Huntand accident:AdrastuskillsAtys. b. Croesushearsit, accusesZeus.
Myres, Herodotus137. Structureof Polycaatesstories: Samian Stories 312ff. Cf. alsoTat undGeschichte 535,note66. Summaryphrasesestablishthesix mainsections,but notthesubsections.Thus atthe beginningofSection IIwehavea gen.absoluteabout Atys'wedding (1.35.1, beg.);Section III beginswith areference to Adrastus'stay in'Sardis(1.36.1, beg.^ withHV8ij);Section IV,again, startswith agen.absolute concerningthe Mysian requests (1.37.1, second line); Section V has a simple participle (1.41.1, beg.); Section VI,a temporalclause; thelast twoexamplesrefer tothepreceding conver sations.Such subdivision is a sign ofelaboration and is not used in all logoi. Itis absent e.g. in.the Arion story (1.2324) and the story of the ring of Polycrates (3.4043).

c. Arrivalofcorpse andAdrastus. d. Croesusseesandforgives Adrastus. e. SuicideofAdrastus. Thestructureofthestoryis basedlargely ona rigiddistinction betweenspeechesandaction.Theactionisreducedtoaminimum. Thecentral structuralproblem of thestory is thefact that there aretwovictimsofmisfortune(AtysandAdrastus) andtwodeaths. This is solved by arranging the speeches^so as to make the two Adrastus episodes connecting hnks between the Croesus Atys scenes. Hence the conversation between ifather and son is central,for initCroesusis persuaded to an action which brings about his son's death. The conversation consists of two pairs of sjieeches, and the twospeeches of Atys areparallel instructure, eachconsistingof anaddressto thefather,the mainargument in theform of rhetorical questions, and a request.'Thus the core ofthewholestoryisCroesus'decision tolethissongoonthehunt. Croesus is the tragic hero of the story, for it is he who tries to outwit the oracle, yet accepts the murderer Adrastus in his house ;itis hewhois persuaded by hisson tolet him goon the hunt, where Adrastus slays him. At the end Croesus recognizes thetruth:heaccuses thegods andforgives Adrastus (who never theless slays himself). In this scheme Adrastusis, theconnecting link andnot amajorfigure.'^ We have herea sequencewhich is truly organic in the sense of tragedy, i.e. each part derives its meaningonlyfrom theexact placeitoccupies. Recently Myres has laid great emphasis upon circular compo sitions (under the name "pedimental compositions"), which he takes tobe themainstructuralfeature of the workof Herodotus
Firstspeech. Secondspeech. Father,formerly Iwas proudto go Father, I understand that you are towar andhunt, butnow youlock worried, but you misinterpret the meup. dream. TowhomcanIshowmyself?What You say I shall die from an iron man will Iseem to citizens, what spear? What hands has a boar? mantdmywife?Whatmanwillshe Whatironspear? thinkto havefora husband? Let mego onthehunt, orconvince Since the battle is not against me, methatitis betterotherwise. letme go. The organization of thespeechescallstomind Corax'tripartitedivision ofspeeches into proemiumagonepilogue (O. Navarre, Essai sur la rhtorique grecque avant Aristote[Paris 1900]15f.). DifferentlyHellmann, KroisosLogos58ff. Cf.Ch.IV,157.

72

FORMAND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

GH. n.STYLE AND STRUCTURE

73

a s a w h o l e . W e h a v e s e e n t h a t t h i s i s e r r o n e o u s . C i r c u l a r c o m positions (onewishes theterm"ringcomposition"wereavailable forthem) occuronlyon arelativelyTestrictedscale, becausethey presuppose an exact correspondence betweena small number of sectionsofalogosinsuchaway thatthemainactionoccursin the center of the.logos, and the preceding and following sections correspond to ech other in inverse sequence. I have tried to showelsewheie thatthestoryof theringof Polycrates bearssuch a circular arrangement. J Another story of this type is that of Arion and theDolphin, rightlyanalyzed by'Myres ascircular.'^ At the center of such storiesthere isalways aparticularly vivid scene (thefisherman bringing back thefish'with the ringin it; Arionflinging himself into the se). These are often stories in which the resulting fortne or misfortune is' not primarily the consequenceofthehero'sdecision.Afine example,onasomewhat largerscale,are theseaskirmishes beforeArtemisium:
1. ThreeGreek shipsattacked by ten Persian, and worsted.The Greenes withdraw from Artemisium to Chalcis. Th^^Persians advanceto CapeSpias. 2. Thenumbersof thePersian navyandarmy uptothis point. 3. The storm off Magnesia reduces that number. (Stories of BoreasandofAmeinocles.) Praye;^ofMagiassuagethestorm. 4. Greeks sacrifice to Poseidon and return to Artemisium. The Greeksworstfifteen Persianships. (7.17995)

^numberofthoughtpatternsrecurthroughoutthework ;theyare of great importance in reinforcing the continuity that exists betweenthe separatelogoi. One elementary thought pattern concerns the Herodotean analysisof humanevents intothought and action. H.Bischoff,in a valuable dissertation, has noted the proclivity of Herodotus (ultimatelyderived from Homer)for separatinga previousstage ofcounselfromtheactionproper,evenwherethisisnotnecessary :
AssoonasCroesushadwithdrawnafterthebattleofPteria.. Cyrus took counsel and found it to be his business to go to Sardis as soon as possible...And.as he had decided, so he actedwith speed. (1.79.1)

Thefullpatternofthistypeconsistsofcounsel,decision,andaction, butshorterforms(counselandaction,orsimplywordandaction) arealso found.' With this intellectuaUzation of the action (if I may call it that) we may contrast a formula where action is basedon passion:
When the army had been counted and arranged in order, Xerxes desired to pass it iri reviw in person. Afterward h did this...(7.100.1)

Thecentral complexhereis thestoryof thestorm whichcaused a reversal of fortune, .a theme reinforced by the preceding account of the size of Persian ajmament. The two stories of sea skirmishes underline this reversal: again it is dueto anout sideagency ratherthan thumandecision.'
VI

In some instances the desire is felt to be so important that it replacestheaccountof theactionitself."Theintellectual,rather thanthe emotional,formulais thefountainheadof thenumerous counselscenes inHerodotus,for a man must either takecounsel withhimself or receiveitfromothers:
Be itthat someone else suggested it to him when'he was in'a quandary, or that he himself learned what^had to be done, Cyrusactedasfollows...'"(r.191.1)

InHerodotus,tobeone'sowncounselor,or toreceiveadvice,are
'The remarksaboveand thesection followingarebased largelyupon Bischoff, Earner. See also R. Lattimore,"The Wise Adviser in Herodotus," CP 34 (1939) 2435.Further,p.M.Bowra,Early^Greek Elegists (Cambridge[Mass.] 1938)7980, andSophoc{ean Tra^^(Oxford1944) 106;Tat undGeschichte 52934;H.D. Kemper, Rat und Tat. . Studien zur Darstellung einh antithetischen Begriffspaares in der klassischen Periode der griechischen Literatur (Diss. Bonn 1957, published by the author in 190) 4748. Examplesare: (l)'wordand ^ction,3.134.6; (2) counseland action, 2.30.3; cf.3.119.4; 4.102.1; (3) counsel, decision, and action, 3.17.2 and 25.1ff.; 3.153.1 154.1.A commonformula is ovXtvonfvoiotSofe;see Powell, Lexicon,s.v.,$oKea> 3c. " Thefull formula is used e.g. in 2.135.34; 7.128.2; but the short formula is actuaUymorecommoii:1.24.1;1.201=204.1;3.120,1= 120.4;3.127.1,etc.

Thelast examplesofthe precedingsection havebeen basedon certain patternsof narrative whichare notstrictly formalin the senseofverbal repetition.Inadditiontosuch narrative patterns,
Myres,Herodotus 79ff.Introduction, note32. SamianStories 317. Ch.I,35andnote 61. " Ch.VI, 264.Thefigures for thelandarmy, whichare irrelevantto thestory, areadded becausethecomputation completes thearmyand navylistsgiven forthe Persiansin7.61ff. r

74

FORM AND THOUGHT IN HERODOTUS

CH.II. STYLE AN STRUCTURE

75

equivalent'situations.'^This intellectual element is so important in Herodotus that council scenes sometimes overshadow the account of the action itself, e.g. in the accounts of the great battlesin thePersian Wars. Between thought and action a pause occurs, which may be filled (strange as that may seem to us) by other material.Thus Cyrus'campaignagainstthe Massagetaeisintroducedasfollows: WhenGyru hadconquered (theAssyrians) is well,he desired tobring the'Massagetaeunder hisyoke. (1.201) Thisis followed bysome ethnographicmaterial, after which the idea of a desire to attack is repeated (1.204.1). Then follows a short ai^statement, plus an account of Cyrus' attempt to gain his objective peaceably. This isfinally followed by the action itself (1.205.2). Similarly, the narrative may be broken between the stages of the action itself, a fact especially noticeable in campaignlogoi. Thuswe oftenfind materialadded inthe pauses betweenthestages:planpreparationsmarchbattleretreat, but the preferred place for such interruptions is between the planningstage and the other phases ofa campaign. Thiscorre spondsto thedichotomyof thoughtand,action.' Advice and warning thus occur in certain specified positions in the narrative. The occasion is usually the seeking of advice by the ruler, but sometimes the adviser apj5ears unexpectedly, prioi"totheaction.Theforminwhichadviceisgivenvariesfroma pithy saying to a short speech, a conversation, or an elaborate oration.Thereis adefinite pattern of advice,which initsfull form consists of three main parts: gnomicsayings embodying a view of theworld, ageneral warningoftenof a negative kind ("don't actrashly,"orthelike),andspecificadvicedealingwithapractical problemandusually embodyingapositive plan.Theeffectof the advice given depends on whether or not itis accepted: usually, but not always,general adviceis rejected", and thusitbecomes a
"Bischoff, Warner 811 and 26 fF. This contrasts with the wellknown'lines in Hesiod,Erga29397,wheretobecounseledbyanotherisinferiortotakingcounselwith oneself.In Herodotus, counselorssometimes address their audience asif thelatter weretakingcounselwiththemselves;soArtabanus,7.10d.2,andThemistocles,8.60c. 1 (cf.abo7.157.3).Cf.alsothe adviceofMnesiphilusandofAristids toThemistocles Ch.V,224and Ch.VI,277.. 'Pausebetween planningand action, e.g. 3.17ff. (Cambyses' Ethiopian cam paign).Pausesbetweenstagesofaction,especiallythemarchof Xerxes,Ch.III,132. Adviserscenesareoftenplacedin thepauses,c.g.1.27.12"and1.71.2.

warning which has a dramatic effect within the course of the narrative. In this case, the Wise adviser appears as the warner whoshows upthe follyof theruler.Specific advice,on theother hand,is usuallyaccepted,so thatthe adviserthen appearsas the wisecounselor.Thefullformofadvice is preseftt onlyin asingle case,theadvice'givenbyArtabhustoXerxesattheHellespont. ThereArtabanusbeginsbydescribing thetroublesoflife (general gnm),thenwarnsXerxesofthedangersoflandandsea(general advice,hererejected),andfinally advjseshimtoleavethelonians behind (practical advice, here also rejected). The same pattern is presupposed in the advice'given by Croesus to Cyrus before thelatter entersthecountry of the Massagetae,a cenewhich is often misunderstood. There the question is specifically whether or not tocross theriverAraxesto givebattle tothequeen of the Massagetae. Croesus begins,by describing the wheel of fortune in all human ffairs (general gnm), thereby implying that he cannot give advice on whether Cyrus will be victorious (i.e. he refuses to pronounce upon the question of general advice),and finally advises crossing the river,since this will save the empire even if Cyrus should be defeated (specific advice, which is accepted).^ Elsewhere, there are various combinations ofone ormore ofthe threeelements ofthe patternof advice. Theseexamples maysuffice toshowthe'importanceofthought patterns for the analysis of the work. Similar patterns'may be found for omens and predictions, and in'other cases where the outcome of action is prefigured in the narrative. In order to understandthese cases,itis necessaryto beawareof whatIhave called thefull formin eachinstance,for the nrrativef Herod otus is often elliptic, and a short story or phrase may be un intelligiblewithout referenceto thecompletepattern. Onefurther pattern must be discussed in detail, since it fur nisl^es a basicclue to thestructure of thework in atleast three
80Hdt.7.4651.Action 4144. Hdt.1.207.itisnot true(as isclaimed e.gby HowandWells adloc., perhaps followingCambyses, 3.36.3) thatCroesusis responsiblefor Cyrus'defeat,or haslost hiswisdom. Thecorrect interpretationis given byHellmann, KroisosLogos83, note 1.Cf.alsoBischoff, Warner4344. Based on theliSts in Lattimore,CP 34 (above,note 76), theevidence for the differenttypesisasfollovt^:(1) warning,advice,a.ngnm:7.4651.(2) warningand advice:7.10;5.36; 8.68;9.2;9.41.(3)adviceandnom;1.207; 3.40.(4)warningand gnm:frequent,e.g.9.122;6.11;6.109.

76

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

CH.II. STYLE AKD STRUCTURE

77

crucialsections. This,is the patternof the rise andfall of.rulers, which is basic for the logoi dealing with Croesus, Cyrus, and Darius.This patterninturn is basedon theidea of areversalof fortune, which^is so ^asic to Herodotus'jjphilosophy of history that hesometimes seiyis to report on the complete life story of anindividualmerelytogiv,e emphasistoa changeoffortune: .Amemocles"thesonof Cretines,a Magnesianwho farmednear CapeSepias,found^theshipwreck(of thePersians) muchtohis advantage. He collected nj^ny gold and silver cupslater cast ashore, andfinding hoards of Persian treasure he acquired untold wealth.However, although hebecame veryrich byhis finds,hewasnot otherwiselucky;forhetqowashit byanugly andgrievous misfortune, thedeathof hisson/,(7.190) ThelaststatementisaddednotsomuchforthepurposeoWrawing amorallessonastoshowadifferenceinfortune.Inothercaesthe statementissoshort thatitmaybe misunderstodunlessonehas thewholepattern inmind. , Reversalof fortuneis theclimaxof theelaborate pattern of the riseand fallof aruler.Thefullpattern maybeoutlined asfollows : 1. Origin of the ruler (how he was Ijorn, or how he came to power). , 2; Ea,rlyeign untilfull poweris achieved. (Thisis usuallybrief, nd thereisasudden riseto highfortune.) 3. Furtherreign, toldatlength,and,leadingto.destruction,or at leastto adecline.
**Onthisstorycf. alsoCh.V,189."Hetoo:"presumablylikethePersians; the storydrawsaparallelbetween thefateofthePersiansand thatofaGreek.However, twopoints inthestory arobscure:(1) didthe deathpf Ameinocles*sonprecedeor followtheacquisitionof thetreasures?These^ndseemsmorelikely;thusthefateof Ameinocleswould jjaralleldirectly thatof thePersians. (2) Did Ameinocles killhis son,ordidhelosehimbyanaturaldeath?ThefactthatDionys.Halic.,Arch.3.21.1, andPlut., Mor.864,interpretthestoryintheformersensedocsnotproveitscorrect ness,andthematter remainsapuzzle.SeeMacanon7.190, line10. isused byHerodotus bothfor accidentsand forcrimes (involuntary,1.35.1, etc.,but isnot 3.52.4voluntary?);seePowell, Lexicons.v. Frnkel,Stileigenheit 67,note 3, issurely wrong in connecting the expression "an ugly misfortune" {axapts with aristocraticfeelings'alien toHerodotus, for thelatter,us^es jt.in analmost formulaic way,both*foraccidentsandforcrimes;seePowell,Lexicons.v. Theoppositeto ax<^pts is evxpioTos as used .by Solon before^Croesus :... fat iirtira xeAeimjajj tvxcpi^iosTOV iov (1.32.9).Thisisa widespreadJerininolpgy,whichlooksatevents

Throughout the work, Herodotus emphasizes the origin of d king or a dynasty; the story of Candaules'' Wife'is important for the accession story of Gyges, the fiinde of the Mermnad dynastyinLydia (1.813)'.' Deices,thejudg of the Medes who made himself into the absolute rulr of his pple, initiates the Mediandynasty(lQGslOl). Inthesame\Vy,'theoriginsofCyrus and (in a mor restricted'form) the accession of Darius are fundamental'bothfo*th Persiandyrias'tyand for thefateof the individualrulersconcerned.The samestressfon origin^is present in the accounts ofSomeoftheEgyptiankings,'aindon the Greek side in thestoried of the Greek tyrants andthe Cyrnean and Spartankings.* The second element in the pattern is usually more briefly treated,since"whatinterests Herodotusin hisaccounts oftyrants and foreign kings is the descent from power'rather than the ascent thereto.Therefore,a warningisoflen addedatthe'height of fortune: Gyges was warned'^TDy "the'Delphic oracle after his accession;Croesus waswarnedby Solonand alsobythedeathof hisson Atys; Cyrusis more obscurely warned by Astyages after thelatter's defeat;Darius receives'no wrning because heis not. destroyed, but,thesection on th Ends of the World following directlyupontheaccountofDarius'greatprosperityhasasimilar function for the'Tader. Theiwrnings received by Xerxes are numerous.Th connection,between highfortune andwarning is bestshownin thecaseof Polycrates,whose constantgoodluckis theoccasionof thewarningsof Amasis, kingofEgypt.^ Thelast section of the patternof rise andfall usually consists ofthelaterreignofthekingortyrant(so;farasHerodotustellsit).
notdirectly fromthemoralpointofview,butconsidersfirstwhethertheygiveahuman being(cither thesuffereror,vicariously,abystander) pleasureorpain. Cf.further thestory of'Pytheasof Aegina, Ch.V, 190; Sandoces, 7.194.3; the Thebans at Thermopylae, 7.233.2; Sophanes,9.75; Hegesistratus,9.37.4. Itis not accidentalthatsuchstoriesaboundinthenarrativeofthebattlesofthePersianWare. Egypt:Min(2.99.2ff.),Cheops (2.124fif.),Psammetichusandthetwelvekings* (2.147/2ff.),'ApriesandAmasis(2.161.3ff.).OntheGreekside:theriseofPolycrates" (3.39),ofPeisistratus (1.59.13),ofthe Cypselids(5.92b ff.),theBattiads (4.150ff.); andtiie Spartankings (6.51ff.,etc.).Seealso Ch.V,19198. 8Gyges, 1.13.2; Croesus, 1.30ff. and 34ff.; Cyrus, 1.128.1; Darius, 3.106 ff. (Ends of the World); Xerxes, 7.10; 37.2, etc. Polycrates: 3.40ff. The Atysstory (1.34ff.) maybeconsidered awarningin deed,and thussimilarto thestoryof the ringofPolycrates,3.40.2ff.,cf.3.124.1.The sectionontheEndsoftheWorlddiffers, tobesure,fromtheotherstories,sinceitforeshadowstheendofDariusforthereader, butnotfor themaincharacterhimself.Seefurther.Ch.IV, 172.

78

FORM AND THOUGHTIN HERODOTUS

Thecampaignlogoi ofa particular kingthus partakeofboth the elements of height offortune and of decline or destruction, but there^salwaysaparticular emphasisonreversaloffortunein the accounts,ofcampaignfailures,which areusuallyheavilystressed. Thewhole patternis foundin the accountsof the"great rulers (as wellas inseveralshorter logoi)^ andits recurrence establishes a basicsimilarityfor the.royalhistories, which culminatein the story of Xerxes. The history of the Mermnadae is related to Croesus asthe historyof theMedes is related to Cyrus,and the history of the Persian kings to Xerxes (Origins).The wealth of Croesus corresponds to Cyru' conquest of Babylon, Cambyses' conquest of Egypt, Darius' wealth as described in the satrapy hst, and Xerxes' war preparations (High Fortune). Thefurther wars of thekingsarclargely examplesof theirfailures (Decline). Thecumulativeweight of theseexamplesofonerecurrentpattern forces the reader to accept the Herodotean interpretation of Xerxes'ill successin'the'PersianiWarsasadecisivedefeat.? The ideal pattern of rise and fall at.timesconflits with the actualsituation (bothCyrusand Dariusfoughtfor'some time to gainmasteryoverAsia).Itis neverthelessahistoricalpatternand not a purely moral one. Both the sections on origins and those dealingwithcampaignsaredetailedhistoricalaccountsexplaining thefortunes of great nations and not merely ofindividuals.The varietyof logoi used in this pattern shows that it is no more than a general schemeinto whichhistorical materialis molded, and bywhich thatmaterial isexplained initsinterrelations. Thehistorical narrativeof Herodotusis arranged'primarilyin two groups 'Of compositions: Origins and Campaigns. The ethnographic logoi^ despite their great length, are clearly sub ordinatedtothesemaingroups.Theaccountsofgreatfortuneare more briefly treated, except for the two/Babylonian conquests, which aresymbolicof masteryover Asia,nd theaccount of the Power of Darius, whose reign stands at the ideal center of the work.This simplicity ofarrangement in two groupsof narrative isthefoundation ofthe unityofstructure.
8Ch.IV,176.

ChapterIII THE UNITS OF THE WORK

I

Wehavedescribed thew'orkof HerodofUsasa singfelogoswith special emphasis at the beginningand end, logos cnsisting in turnofasequence'ofsrtialler /^o.Theseare*arrangjed'inasingle rowfromwhich aresuspended, asitWere, separateethnographic and Greek historical logoi at irregular intervals. In.the present chapter, we shall consider the internal structure and the interconnections of these individual logoi, so far as'theycan be established by thecriteria discussed previously.Here we willfind that Herodotusemphasizes certain events (which areembedded instorieshefoundinthetradition)byreferringtothemrepeatedly incertain placesof his narrative,especially atthe beginningand end of a logos, with the effect that,these items becomefixed elementsin the development of thework and can be referred to asliterary"motifs" which tie the.work'together.Thistermdoes notimply,ofcourse,thatwe 'doubt .theirfactualnatiire,orthatwe treat the Histories asfiction. Outlines of the work such as that giveninthe prsentchapterhavebeen made,before,butprevious attempts areperhaps somewhat inadequate because of a lack of confidencefeltbytheirauthorsinHerodotus'abilitytoorganize.^ Idisregard the traditional nonHerodotean division of thework into books and chapters, although I doubt that the present division (or any division based on logoi) is usable in maldng an edition.^ *
^SeeIntroduction, notes2733i The ancient (but not Herodotean) division into nine books breaks apart the logosoftheIonianI^eyolt (Books5and6),andtheantecedents beforePlataea(Books 8and9) ;seebelow,115f.^and142.In^clatter case,however,thereresultsaninterest ingparallelismbetween theendofBook8andthebeginningofBook 9,suchasexists between Books6 and 7 ofThucydides also:cf.J.deRomilly, Histoire et raison chez Thucydide (Paris 1956) 73, and^note1. A division into six books wouldperhaps be more rational (1.1216; 23.60; 3.614.205; 5.16.j[,^; 7.18.39; 8.409.*122), but onlyadivision intologoi,suchas thatofLegrand,would bein. thespiritofthe^work. Chapterdivisionspose asimilar problem,since theyare ipasked by.theubiquitous mendeclauses. HenceSteinbegins chapterswiththemen portions,Hude^ththede members.Theformerseemspreferable.

79