Herodotus and Homer

Having taught Herodotus several times, I can tell you that students either love him or hate him. Most come in on the latter, primarily because it is so long and full of material that really doesn't seem relevant. If he is writing about the Persian Wars, they reason, why does it take him until book 5 (of 9) to get to the Battle of Marathon? Why does he have to go off on so many rabbit trails (the mark of a great teacher, IMHO)? I think the answers to these questions lie in his reliance upon the Homeric tradition, in part, and his understanding of the task of history.

I have written elsewhere of Herodotus' understanding of the nature of history, and I don't think reflection has made much difference in my mind yet. Specifically that Herodotus is not just concerned with events in-and-of-themselves, but with the causes of events. This is why after making his opening statement he immediately goes into a discussion of mythological abductions and explains that they were really just part of a long-standing war between East and West, of which the Persian Wars is but the most recent episode.

In terms of his reliance upon the Homeric tradition, this is why Herodotus is so long-winded about such seemingly trivial things as the history of Egypt. In Homer, especially the Iliad, when two warriors come together, they must often have a interview, of sorts, to determine who they are and what their history is. In that culture, Olympian curses have been meted out for less than justly slaying an enemy in a war that your great, great grandfather had made a pact with a hundred years ago. Such is the case for Glaucus and Diomedes (Il. vi.119-236). Upon coming together in battle in book six of the Iliad, Glaucus and Diomedes are smart enough to ask each other's parentage and history before they fight. When it is determined that their grandparents had been friends, they decide not to fight each other (though they turn a blind eye to the killing of their friends). They even exchange gifts to seal the deal.

This exchanging of ancestry is what Herodotus picks up on in his Histories. As he is going through the history of Persia, for example, he comes to the conquest of Egypt by Cambyses. Realizing that his hearers (readers) have little or no knowledge of Egypt, he proceeds to share the history of that great nation before allowing Cambyses to summarily dispense with it. This is simply Homeric in its literary style. Two warriors (this time on the national level) come together to fight. They share their ancestry (but, of course, Herodotus's audience knows their own history) and then proceed to fight.

Knowing this may not make Herodotus any easier to wade through, but it should give comfort that he wasn't just a rambling storyteller (as Thucydides accused). He did it on purpose.

Herodotus' flying snakes?

Probably not, but a student of mine who actually pays attention sent me this link to an article he found while excavating the web one day.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/dec/03/flying-reptile-lacusovagus-magnificens
It is worth a read, even if it comes from a evolutionary worldview. God had made such an amazing variety of creatures. I am constantly impressed by the ones that don't even exist anymore.

The Nature of History according to Herodotus

"These are the researches of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, which he publishes, in the hope of thereby preserving from decay the remembrance of what men have done, and of preventing the great and wonderful actions of the Greeks and the Barbarians from losing their due meed of glory; and withal to put on record what were their grounds of feuds. According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began to quarrel. " (Proem to Herodotus, The Histories)
In this passage, which begins the work of Herodotus, he sets out his own understanding of the nature of history. First, the word Herodotus uses to describe his work is the Greek word "historia" and is usually translated research. This tells us that Herodotus understood history to be the kind of thing that must be researched. Secondly, Herodotus clearly tells us he does this for the sake of preservation. History then, according to Herodotus, engages in actions of preservation. Next we see that Herodotus wants to preserve very specific things. Actions. But it is not just the actions of the Greeks he is concerned with. Rather he is equally concerned that the "great and wonderful actions of the Greeks and Barbarians" be preserved. This tells us that Herodotus considers history to be impartial to some extent. Finally Herodotus tells that history concerns itself with the causes of events, not simply the relation of events.

The Landmark Herodotus

In the tradition of the Landmark Thucydides, the Landmark Herodotus is now on bookshelves. I pre-ordered mine through Amazon and got it today. It is a lovely volume with tons of maps and a running sidebar timeline to help you keep track of where the narrative is going. This volume presents a new translation by Andrea Purvis. I am looking forward to reading it (perhaps over Christmas break). I am linking to it as well, for anyone who wants to get themselves a copy of one of the greatest history books ever written.