Herodotos and his contemporaries

Journal of Hellenic Studies

Volumn 116, Issue , 1996, Pages 62-87

  Fowler, Robert L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886324684     PISSN: 00754269     EISSN: 20414099     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/631956     Document Type: Article

References (333)

1. For treatments of the passage see L. Pearson, Early Ionian historians (Oxford 1939) 3 f.
2. W. Kendrick Pritchett, Dionysius of Halicarnassus: on Thucydides (University of California Press 1975)
3. T.S. Brown in AHR lix (1953–1954) 834 ff.
4. Sandra Gozzoli, ‘Una teoria antica sull'origine della storiografia greca’, SCO xix-xx (1970–1971) 158–211
5. David L. Toye, ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus on the first Greek historians’, AJP cxvi (1995) 279–302. For details of the textual criticism I may refer to my forthcoming edition of the early mythographers.
6. For the reading $ <γ∊> cf. Thuc. 23.4 sqq., where Dionysios carefully reminds us that each dialect has its own character.
7. Hekataios wrote $ (also cited as $ and once as $, FGrH 1 F 8) and the Periodos
8. Akousilaos wrote $.
9. Strabo i.3.1 p. 47 = FGrH 5 T 7, F 8.
10. Porph. fr. 409 Smith apud Eus. Praep. Evang. x.3.16 p. 466b = FGrH 5 T 5 = Hellan. FGrH 4 T 17.
11. See Pearson (n. 1) 115. The Olympic date in this fragment, which is preserved by Clement, might be someone else's calculation on the basis of some synchronism in Xanthos; on this assumption the fragment may be accepted as genuine.
12. See R. Drews, The Greek accounts of eastern history (Princeton 1973) 102, who, however, thinks that Ephoros may have drawn an incorrect inference about their chronological relationship from Xanthos' subject matter which for the most part seems to treat an earlier period than Herodotos.
13. Against this see Peter Kingsley, ‘Meetings with magi: Iranian themes among the Greeks, from Xanthus of Lydia to Plato's Academy’, JRAS v (1995) 173–209 at 174 n. 12.
14. RE ix A.2(1967) 1354.
15. F. Jacoby, Atthis (Oxford 1949) 184
16. introduction to FGrH 323a pp. 8 f.
17. Über die Entwicklung der gnechischen Historiographie und den Plan einer neuen Sammlung der griechischen Historikerfragmente’, Klio ix (1909) 80–123
18. = Abhandlungen zur griechischen Geschichtsschreibung ed. H. Bloch (Leiden 1956) 16–64
19. RE articles on Hekataios (vii.2 [1912] 2666–2769)
20. Hellanikos (viii.1 [1912] 104–53)
21. Herodotos (suppl. ii [1913] 205–520), all reprinted in Griechische Historiker (Stuttgart 1956)
22. Atthis ch. III §4 et passim
23. introduction to FGrH 323a.
24. Support (with some qualifications) in K. von Fritz, Die griechische Geschichtsschreibung (Berlin 1967)
25. more recently in S. Hornblower, Greek historiography, ed. S. Hornblower (Oxford 1994) 15 f.
26. compare his Thucydides (London 1987) 19 n. 14.
27. Atthis 201.
28. Fit. 13–13a West.
29. Vorsokr. 21 A 1.
30. Panyasis Test. 1 Davies.
31. Cf. also Kallinos fr. 7 West.
32. On ktisis-poetry see now C. Dougherty, ‘Archaic Greek foundation poetry: questions of genre and occasion’, JHS cxiv (1994) 35–46
33. to her discussion of the occasion of elegy add R.L. Fowler, The nature of early Greek lyric (Toronto 1987) ch. 3. Her general scepticism about the genre's separate existence does not affect the point made here.
34. The ($ attributed to Semonides of Amorgos (test. 1 West), though scarcely a title originating with the author, presumably treated the island's foundation. Cf. F. Lasserre, ‘L'historiographie grecque à l’époque archaïque’, QS iv (1976) 113–42 at 119 ff.
35. Jacoby repeatedly questioned Dionysios' evidence because it was ultimately based only on the style of the authors concerned; consequently he simply ignored him (e.g. ‘ganz unbrauchbar’ RE viii.1 109). But style is no very bad criterion–indeed, it is a better one than Jacoby's, if you have nothing else to go on.
36. Atthis 182
37. RE suppl. ii 404.
38. Jacoby, ‘Über die Entwicklung’ (n. 20) 49 ff., insists that anything called $ must have proceeded $.
39. FGrH 4 FF 171–172 = 323a FF 25–26 (references to events of 407/6 BC).
40. [Lucianus] Macr. 22 = FGrH 4 T 8, 323a T 6 (lived to 85 years of age).
41. Vit. Eurip. (i 2.5 Schwartz) = FGrH 4 T 6, 323a T 4 (he and Euripides both born on the day of Salamis).
42. Wilamowitz, Kleine Schriften iv 673 n. 1 explains the name on the analogy of $ and ‘$ as ‘victor over the Greeks’ in athletic contests (he might have cited also ’ $).
43. Cf. L. Pearson, The local historians of Attica (Philadelphia 1942) 5 f.
44. The name is then the ethnic with changed accent. For other occurrences of the name see P.M. Fraser and E. Matthews, A lexicon of Greek personal names i (Oxford 1987) s.v. (One example from the 3rd century AD is written -$, for what it is worth; the name of the historian himself may also occur, so spelled, twice in POxy liii 3711.)
45. Aul. Gell. 15.23 = FGrH 4 T 3, 323a T 5
46. Suda δ 41= Damastes FGrH 5 T 1, Hellan. 4 T 9 (quoted above p. 64).
47. Aulus' source is Pamphila, FHG iii 521 fr. 7, who places his birth in 496/5 (reckoning inclusively; she says he was 65 in 432/1)
48. this would place his $ in 457/6, close to the year of Euripides' first production (456/5), which F. Riihl, RhM lxi (1906) 475, argued was the foundation of her (Apollodoros’) date
49. Hellanikos' Suda article (= FGrH 4 T 1, 323a T 1) synchronises the two writers.
50. See further Alden A. Mosshammer, ‘The Apollodoran Akmai of Hellanicus and Herodotos’, GRBS xiv (1973) 5–13.
51. At Eus. (Hieron.) Chron. p. 107e Helm = FGrH 4 T 4a, Hellanikos is said to have been ‘clarus’ in O1. 70.1 (a. 500/499; the Armenian version gives 01. 69.3, the Chronicon Paschale O1. 67.1); on the assumption that this date represents a misreading of $ as & floruit rather than a birthdate, we have another testimony to the standard ancient view, which should not be tossed aside without reason: whether born in 495 or 480, he was born early in the century like Herodotos.
52. Pomp. 3.6 = FGrH 4 T 12, 323a T 2b, 687a T 1, referring to work(s) which treated the same subject as Herodotos; there are several candidates ($). The Suda entry synchronises him with Herodotos.
53. Plut. Them. 21.7 = FGrH 262 F 11.
54. Suda χ 136 = FGrH 262 T 1.
55. F. Jacoby, ‘Charon von Lampsakos’, SIFC xv (1938) 207–242
56. = Abhandlungen (n. 20) 178–206.
57. H.D. Westlake, Thucydides on Pausanias and Themistocles- a written source?’, CQ xxvii (1977) 95–110 at 108 n. 74, finds Jacoby's arguments weak
58. detailed criticism in Gozzoli (n. 1) 169 n. 33
59. Drews (n. 15) 24 ff.
60. Mauro Maggi, ‘Autori greci di Persika. II: Carone di Lampsaco’, ASNP vii (1977) 1–26 at 5 n. 17
61. Silvio Accame, ‘La leggenda di Ciro in Erodoto’, MGR viii (1982) 1–43 at 26 ff.
62. Drews (n. 15) 25. One might think a discussion of Themistokles' exile points to a treatment of the Pentekontaetia; but he could have looked briefly forward to the admiral's demise after a treatment of Salamis. (Jacoby p. 178 calls this idea ‘very improbable’; the reasons given on pp. 202 ff. in support of this judgment are of a very general kind. Obviously, it is perfectly possible.)
63. See Jacoby, intro to FGrH 323a p. 4
64. Gomme on Thuk. iv 133.2–3.
65. Vorsokr. 88 B 32–37.
66. In his re-edition of Vossius' De historicis graecis, p. 21 n. 63.
67. If the emendation is correct (it is certainly plausible, though Jacoby p. 187 thought it ‘most improbable’), the further question arises whether this is not simply an alternative title for the ‘$ listed immediately before in the Suda. It is possibly relevant that a Spartan king bore the name Prytanis (Hdt. viii 131).
68. De Hdt. mal. 20 p. 859b = FGrH 262 F 9.
69. Similarly Tert. De Anim. 46 = FGrH 262 F 14.
70. FGrH 709
71. pseudo-Skylax in GGM i 154 ff. Transmitted titles are $. Herodotos, of course, names Skylax himself at iv 44.
72. FHG iv 408
73. GGM i 1 ff.
74. FGrW 687.
75. Only transmitted title, $ Synchronised by the Suda s.v. $ (= FGrH 1 T 1) with Dareios; the same entry says Herodotos borrowed from him.
76. Wrote genealogical ‘$. (once cited as $, FGrH 3 F 54, no doubt by confusion with the Syrian).
77. He is probably to be dated to about 470: see G. Huxley, ‘The date of Pherekydes of Athens’, GRBS xiv (1973) 137–143
78. R. Thomas, Oral tradition and written record in classical Athens (Cambridge 1989) 161 ff.
79. FGrH 555; $ Died sometime after 424/3 (below, n. 109).
80. FGrH 392
81. Vorsokr. 36
82. TrGF 19
83. IEG ii 79; wrote $ plus poetic, philosophical, and other works.
84. First tragedy produced O1. 82 (452/48); dead by 421 (Ar. Pax 827 ff.).
85. FGrH 8; son of the poet's daughter $, perhaps also $.
86. FGrH 536; ‘$.
87. FGrH 379; $ (also cited as $ and $).
88. FGrH 378; $.
89. FGrH 417; $.
90. FGrH 769; $.
91. FGrH 13, IEG ii 97; ‘$.
92. Damastes‘ $ ’ $ (a phrase, as Jacoby ad loc. remarks, presumably taken from the proem) was, it seems, a Hellenika, but was probably later than Herodotos. The fragments of Charon contain tantalizing references to Persian affairs; for discussion of possible connections with Herodotos see Accame (n. 37)
93. L. Piccirilli, ‘Carone di Lampsaco e Erodoto’, ASNP v (1975) 1239–1254.
94. The qualification ‘by named authors’ excludes the works in the Hippocratic corpus. Known beginnings are: Hekataios FGrH I F 1
95. Herakleitos fr. 1 Marcovich
96. Ion of Chios $. 20 von Blumenthal
97. Antiochos of Syracuse nept ‘$ 555 F 2
98. Alkmaion of Kroton Vorsokr. 24 B 1
99. Philolaos of Kroton 44 B 1
100. Diogenes of Apollonia 64 B 1
101. Kritias $ 88 B 32
102. Herodotos and Thukydides. Depending on the reading, Anaxagoras 59 B 1 may be included as an eleventh example: that is, whether ‘…$ “$…”’ or ‘…$. “$…”’ is correct.
103. This chest-thumping habit of early writers is commented on by Aristeides (xxviii 68) in a minor testimonium that escaped Jacoby's notice: $. Cf. Joseph. Ap. i 16 = Eus. Praep. Evang. x 7.12 p. 478c
104. = Akous. FGrH 2 T 6, Hell. 4 T 18 on the frequent disagreement between Hellanikos and Akousilaos
105. Thuk. i 97.2 = FGrH 4 T 16, 323a T 16 (the celebrated attack on Hellanikos)
106. Aristophanes FGrH 379 F 5 (attacking Herodotos).
107. See also Hippias FGrH 6 F 4, a verbatim quotation of a passage that might well be from a proem, in which Hippias brags about his $.
108. L. Koenen, ‘Der erste Satz bei Heraklit und Herodot’, ZPE xcvii (1993) 95–6, argues that the deictic pronoun refers to the book itself; ultimately (once the book was deposited somewhere) it must have that effect, but the original reference is to the performance, and thus effectively to the author.
109. For Thukydides' proem see the study of A.M. Bowie, ‘The beginnings of Thucydides’, in Tria lustra. Essays and notes presented to John Pinsent (Liverpool Classical Monthly, Liverpool 1993) 141–147.
110. B.phil.Woch. xlv [1925] 778 ff.
111. In looking for interesting examples I have extended the list of authors to include slightly later ones, but no later than the early fourth century: Agias/Derkylos (FGrH 305)
112. Anaximander of Miletos the younger (FGrH 9)
113. Andron of Halikarnassos (FGrH 10)
114. pseudo-Epimenides (FGrH 457)
115. pseudo-Eumelos (FGrH 451)
116. Herodoros of Herakleia (FGrH 31)
117. Metrodoros of Chios (FGrH 43)
118. Polos of Akragas (FGrH 7)
119. Skamon of Mytilene (son of Hellanikos; FGrH 476)
120. Hippias of Elis (FGrH 6)
121. Stesimbrotos of Thasos (FGrH 107)
122. Kratippos of Athens (FGrH 64)
123. Akesandros (FGrH 469)
124. Thibron (FGrH 581)
125. Kritias (Vorsokr. 88 B 32–37). I cast an occasional glance sideways at Thukydides; at Xenophon not at all.
126. FGrH 1 FF 27, 26
127. FGrH 1 F 15.
128. FGrH 4 F 191; further examples at fir. 28, 72, 104b, 148, 168a.
129. G.E.R. Lloyd, Magic, reason and experience. Studies in the origin and development of Greek science (Cambridge 1979)
130. id. The revolutions of wisdom. Studies in the claims and practice of ancient Greek science (Berkeley 1987).
131. On rationalization in Herodotos see A. Lesky, ‘Aithiopika’, Hermes lxxxvii (1959) 27–38
132. = Gesammelte Schriften (Bern/Munich 1966) 410–421
133. A.B. Lloyd, Herodotus Book II (Leiden 1975) i 135 ff., 162 ff.
134. Virginia Hunter, Past and process in Herodotus and Thucydides (Princeton 1982) 107 ff.
135. FGrH 31 FF 4, 13, 14, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30, 57, 58, 63 bis. On the other hand Kerberos growls still at fr. 31.
136. FGrH 2 F 29: the Cretan bull captured by Herakles was the one that bore Europa–which was not, therefore, Zeus metamorphosed; 2 F 37: the fleece was not golden, but dyed purple from the sea.
137. See also Agias/Derkyllos 305 F 6
138. Xanthos 765 F 20.
139. On etymology see E. Risch, ‘Namensdeutungen und Worterklärungen bei den ältesten griechischen Dichtern’, in Eumusia, Festschrift Ernst Howald (Erlenbach/Zurich 1947) 72–91
140. = Kleine Schriften (Berlin/New York 1981) 294–313
141. M. Salvadore, II nome, la persona. Saggio sull’ etimologia antica (Genova 1987)
142. other references listed by L.E. Woodbury, Phoenix xxxiv (1980) 114 n. 12
143. Collected writings (Atlanta 1991) 341 n. 12.
144. FGrH 1 F 22; further in Hekataios note fr. 15 (‘Oineus' from $, what the ancients called $).
145. FGrH 3 F 102.
146. FGrH 392 F 1;43F3 bis.
147. Something like an etymology at iv 189: the Greeks, it is argued, got their custom of dressing Palladia in $ (something like a goatskin) from the Libyans, who use $ (real goatskins) for the same purpose.
148. See Henry R. Immerwahr, Form and thought in Herodotus (Cleveland 1966) index s.v. ‘etymologies’. If pressed to state how ‘popular’ and ‘scientific’ etymology are to be distinguished, one might not be successful in stating universally valid criteria, but the latter usually seems more self-conscious and displays a pretence of being based on some theoretical understanding of the phenomenon; in particular, it may be used to construct or confirm an historical hypothesis.
149. FGrH 4 FF 89, 19b
150. cf. 33 (Maloeis), 38 (Areopagos), 71 (Sinties), 108 (Agammeia), 111 (Italy), 123 (Pelias), 130 (Aphetai), 188 (Helots). Instances in other writers: Andron 10 FF 4 (Selloi), 8 (Parnassos)
151. Aristophanes of Boiotia apud Phot. p. 237 Porson = Suda X 867 s.v. $ (Arist. of Byzantium fr. dub. 421 Slater
152. not in FGrH 379; the rites were so named $)
153. Charon 262 F 12 (Hamadryads)
154. Herodoros 31 F 45 (Miletos)
155. Hippias 6 F 6 ($)
156. Menekrates 769 F 2 (Lykia)
157. Stesimbrotos 107 FF 12 (Daktyloi), 13 (Dionysos)
158. Xanthos 765 F 15 (Mysoi)
159. Xenomedes 442 F 4 (Telchines). The concentration of this activity in the later part of the fifth century is obvious.
160. FGrH 4 F 125 = 323a F 23.
161. Unfortunately this assumption is crucial to P. Vidal-Naquet's enormously influential theory of the Black Hunter: ‘The black hunter and the origin of Athenian ephebe’, PCPSx'w (1968) 49–64
162. reprinted with corrections most recently in id., The black hunter. Forms of thought and forms of society in the Greek world (Baltimore 1986) 106–128.
163. See also ‘The black hunter revisited’, PCPS xxxii (1986) 126–144.
164. FGrH 3 F 13; 31 F 16; 9 F 1.
165. The words $ in a paraphrased fragment of Xanthos (FGrH 765 F 29) may well come from him.
166. Paus. v 18.3.
167. FGrH 378 F 6 (a verbatim quotation).
168. FGrH 31 F51; cf. fr. 31.
169. FGrH AM F 1.
170. Further instances of the phenomena discussed in this paragraph: Hek. FGrH 1 FF 10, 84, 119, 127–9, 234, 239, 275, 308–9, 372
171. Pher. 3 FF 54, 64a, 79a, 84, 125, 145, 155
172. Hell. 4 FF 4, 6, 23, 25, 26a, 51, 59–60, 77, 79a, 109, 115, 117, 150, 163, 165, 197 bis
173. Aethlios 536 F 3
174. Agias/Derkyllos 305 FF 4, 7, 8, 8 bis
175. Andron 10 FF 6, 16a
176. Antiochos 555 FF 3, 11, 12
177. Aristophanes 379 FF 2, 4, 9
178. Armenidas 378 FF 3, 5
179. Charon 262 FF 7, 8, 12
180. Deilochos 471 FF 3, 5, 7a, 9
181. Epimenides 457 F 11
182. Eumelos 451 F 4
183. Herodoros 31 FF 34a, 48
184. Menekrates 769 F 2
185. Xanthos 765 F 17
186. Xenomedes 442 F 1.63.
187. As for instance Hdt. i 94.1: ‘[The Lydians] are the first people we know of to mint coins of gold and silver.’
188. On the theme generally see A. Kleingünther, $, Philol. suppl. xxvi.l (1933).
189. In addition to the examples listed in the text, note Hellanikos FGrH 4 FF 71 b, 86, 175, 189
190. Damastes 5 F 6
191. Xanthos 765 F 4
192. Hippias 6F8
193. Andron 10 F 13.
194. Hekataios FGrH 1 F 20
195. Dionysios 687 F 1
196. Anaximander 9 F 3
197. Hdt. v 58
198. Andron 10 F 9.
199. FGrH 10 F 10.
200. FGrH 4 F 178.
201. FGrH 262 FF 7, 3.
202. Diog. Laert. i 24 = FCrW 6 F 5 ($); but the word may be Diogenes' (and is in fact attributed, via Hippias and Aristotle, to Thales!). However, the word appears also in Pindar and the tragedians, so nothing much should be made of this.
203. FGrH 31 F 22a.
204. This word is not so common in the two surviving historians, either: in Herodotos, only at ix 71 ($)
205. Thukydides, at i 6.2, 10.1, 21.1, ii 42.2.
206. In Hekataios note fr. 21, $: Herodian, who reports the fragment (Π. μ.ov. $ ii 912.23 Lentz), says that Hekataios himself reports that this is the Phoenician equivalent of $($). Further examples are Hek. FGrH 1 FF 322, 370
207. Charon 262 F 5
208. Hell. 4 FF 54, 60, 111
209. Xanthos 765 FF 16, 20d, 23
210. Menekrates 769 F 1. Similar is Hek.fr. 15: Hekataios says that $ is the older word for $, and draws therefrom an historical inference.
211. Local curiosities etc.: many fragments of Hekataios and Skylax; Aethlios FGrH 536 FF 1, 3
212. Agias/Derkyllos 305 F 7
213. Antiochos 555 F 1
214. Armenidas 378 F 4a
215. Charon 262 FF 1,5
216. Damastes 5 F 5 = Hellanikos 4 F 195 (a marvel: some Epeians live 200, even 300 years)
217. Hell. 4 FF 53, 54, 66, 67, 71a, 137, 174, 184, 190
218. Herod. 31 F 31
219. Kritias Vorsokr. 88 B 32 sqq.
220. Metrodoros 43 F 3
221. Pher. 3 F47
222. Xanthos 765 FF 13, 31
223. Xenomedes 442 F 1.
224. For statistics see Damastes 5 FF 2 (distance between the pillars of Herakles), 10 (size of Kypros)
225. Pher. 3 F 30 (size of Ares' field)
226. Hek. 1 FF 197 (size of the Aegean, though the stade figure is not his), 332 (three days to cross the $).
227. References to earlier literature may be found in E. Vandiver, Heroes in Herodotus. The interaction of myth and history (Frankfurt a.M. 1990) 133 n. 1
228. Alden A. Mosshammer, The chronicle of Eusebius and Greek chronographic tradition (Lewisburg and London 1979) 105–111
229. see also the important work of Pietro Vannicelli, Erodoto e la storia dell'alto e medio arcaismo (Sparta - Tessaglia - Cirene) (Rome 1993) 9 ff.
230. E. Meyer, Forschungen zur alien Geschichte i (Halle 1892) 153–209.
231. Cf. D.W. Prakken, Studies in Greek genealogical chronology (Lancaster, PA 1943) 22 f.
232. If this conjecture is correct, it removes the basis for Meyer's inference of a 40-year generation, which was this figure of 900 divided by the number of Spartan kings. The only real hint of a 40-year generation left in early sources, therefore, is Thuk. i 12.3 (Dorian invasion 80 years after Troy). Multiples of 40 in Herodotos at i 163.2 and iii 23.1 are suggestive, but hardly probative. See now W. Burkert, ‘Lydia between East and West, or how to date the Trojan war: a study in Herodotus’, in J.B. Carter, S.P. Morris, edd., The ages of Homer. A tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule (University of Texas 1995) 139–48, who argues with much probability that the 505 years are ultimately derived from Assyrian records.
233. Von Fritz (n. 20) ii 177 n.3 argues that the last sentence of Hdt. ii 146.2 implies that others before him had produced chronological calculations based on genealogies.
234. P. 169, 184 f. Cf. Mosshammer (n. 96) 326 n. 6
235. Lloyd (n. 70) i 193 concludes after a lengthy discussion: ‘That he was interested in chronological questions admits of no doubt.’
236. For further indications of chronographical activity see Agias/Derkyllos FGrH 305 F 2
237. Andron 10 F 13
238. Damastes 5 F 7
239. Hell. 4 FF 74 sqq. (the Priestesses of Argos), 85–6 (the Karneonikai), 152, 168, 169, 201 bis
240. Herod. 31 F 33
241. Ion 392 F 1
242. Xanthos 765 F 32.
243. Cf. S. Hornblower, ‘Narratology and narrative technique in Thucydides’, in S. Hornblower, ed., Greek historiography (Oxford 1994) 131–66 at 151
244. L. Canfora and A. Corcella, ‘La letteratura politica e la storiografia’, in Lo spazio letterario della grecia antica edd. G. Cambiano, L. Canfora, D. Lanza (Rome 1993) i 1.433–71 at 454 ff.
245. especially Hunter (n. 70) chs. 1 and 3.
246. Hipp. Maior 285d = FGrH 6 7 3.
247. Cf. Toye (n. 1) 289, 297.
248. After K.J. Dover, ‘La colonizzazione della Sicilia in Tucidide’, Maia vi (1953) 1–20 = ‘Die Kolonisierung Siziliens bei Thukydides’, in H. Herter, ed., Thukydides (Darmstadt 1968) 344–368
249. see also HCT iv 198 ff.
250. Thebes: FGrH 3 F 84, an aetiological myth concerning Alkmene
251. Delphi: 3 F 64, an aetiological myth concerning Neoptolemos
252. Thorikos: 3 F 34, conjectured to be aetiological by R.L. Fowler, ‘The myth of Kephalos as an aition of rain magic (Pherekydes FGrH 3 F 34)’, ZPE xcvii (1993) 29–42.
253. For the citation of local sources cf. Hell. 4 FF 23, 71a, 137
254. Herod. 31 F 31
255. Metrod. 769 F 2 ($ in a verbatim quotation)
256. Arist. 379 F 6, who quotes from local archives ($).
257. Carolus Luetke (a pupil of Wilamowitz), Pherecydea (Diss. Göttingen 1893) 26.
258. See Pher. FGrH 3 FF 26, 54, 60, 72, 82, 133
259. Hell. 4 FF 104a, 117
260. Andron 10 F 13
261. Deilochos 471 F 5.
262. A.B. Bosworth, ‘Plutarch, Callisthenes, and the peace of Callias’, JHS ex (1990) 1–13.
263. Cf. H.D. Westlake, ‘$ in Thucydides’, Mnem. xxx (1977) 345–62, who finds interesting similarities to and differences from Herodotos' usage.
264. Suda α 942 = FGrH 2 T 1.
265. ∊ 360 = FGrH 2 T 7 = Hec. FGrH 1 T la.
266. Diog. Laert. i 41 = FGrH 2 T 11a
267. Clem. Al. Strom, i 59.5 = 2 T 11b.
268. See T.C.W. Stinton, ‘“Si credere dignum est”: some expressions of disbelief in Euripides and others’, PCPS xxii (1976) 60–89
269. Collected papers on Greek tragedy (Oxford 1990) 236–264.
270. On Herodotos and the Sophists, see Albrecht Dihle, ‘Herodot und die Sophistik’, Philologus cvi (1962) 207–20 (p. 218 on arguments from probability)
271. on contemporary methods of reasoning, see G.E.R. Lloyd, Polarity and analogy (Cambridge 1966) index s.v. Herodotus
272. on early rhetoric, see the references given by R.L. Fowler, HSCP xciii (1987) 15 n. 24.
273. A.B. Lloyd (n. 70) i 149 f., 156 ff.
274. provides a detailed discussion of the connections between Herodotos and the intellectual climate of his day; cf. also Hunter (n. 70) 93 n. 1.
275. PI. Apol. 21
276. for the chronology, W.K.C. Guthrie, History of Greek philosophy (Cambridge 1969) 405 ff.
277. for a carefully reasoned explanation of the connection between the oracle and the $ see T.C. Brickhouse and N.D. Smith, Socrates on trial (Oxford 1989) 87–100.
278. E.g. Herakleitos frr. 5–6 Marcovich
279. Xenophanes Vorsokr. 21 B 34–36
280. Alkmaion 24 B 1
281. Anaxagoras 59 B 21a
282. see further E. Hussey, ‘The beginnings of epistemology: from Homer to Philolaus’, in Epistemology, ed. S Everson (Cambridge 1990) 11–38.
283. Cf. Donald Lateiner, The historical method of Herodotus (Toronto 1989) 66
284. G. Schepens, L’ ‘autopsie’ dans la méthode des historiens grecs du Ve siècle avant J.-C. (Brussels 1980).
285. See i 24.7–8, 117, 122, 209 (a passage which clearly illustrates Herodotos' own awareness of the problem of knowledge), ii 2, 119. Cf. W.R. Connor, ‘The histor in history’, in Nomodeiktes. Greek studies in honor of Martin Ostwald, edd. Ralph M. Rosen, Joseph Farrell (University of Michigan 1993) 3–15, who stresses the old sense of ‘arbitration’ in the root ($ already in Il. xviii 501, xxiii 486). Connor's rather speculative explanation of why the word is less common in the last books seems to overlook one pertinent factor, which is that they treat a period much closer to Herodotos' own time and place, thus needing less $.
286. Detlev Fehling, Herodotus and his ‘sources’. Citation, invention, and narrative art, tr. J.G. Howie (Leeds 1989; German original 1971).
287. Fehling 154 f.; cf. 11, 214 f.
288. E. Will, review of Fehling, Rev. dephil. xlviii (1974) 119–121
289. Hartmut Erbse, ‘Über Herodots Kroisoslogos’, Ausgewahlte Schriften zur klassischen Philologie (Berlin and New York 1979) 180–202 at 181 f.
290. id., ‘Fiktion und Wahrheit im Werke Herodots’, GGN 1991, 131–50 (in my judgment the best reply yet)
291. Oswyn Murray, ‘Herodotus and Oral History’, in H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg and A. Kuhrt, edd., Achaemenid history II: the Greek sources (Leiden 1987) 93–115 at 101 n. 12
292. Simon Hornblower, Thucydides (London 1987) 19 ff.
293. id., introduction to Greek historiography, ed. S. Hornblower (Oxford 1994) 18 f.
294. with further references; J.A.S. Evans, review of Fehling in EMC/CVxi (1992) 57–60
295. id., The Faiyum and the Lake of Moeris’, AHB v.3 (1991) 66–74
296. W. Kendrick Pritchett, The Liar school of Herodotus (Amsterdam 1993)
297. Canfora and Corcella (n. 105) 448 ff.
298. P.J. Rhodes, ‘In defence of the Greek historians’, G&R xli (1994) 156–71 at 160 f.
299. Qualified support and sensible remarks from H.R. Immerwahr in P.E. Easterling, B.M.W. Knox, edd., The Cambridge history of classical literature i (Cambridge 1985) 439 f.
300. An objection to Fehling first raised by Dover and reported by S. Hornblower, Thucydides (London 1987) 22.
301. S. West, ‘Herodotos’ epigraphical interests’, CQ xxxv (1985) 278–305 at 303: ‘The confident assurance of his historical reconstructions is bluff… The inadequacies of his argumentation may well be a matter of period rather than personality. Certainly we find rather similar procedures in the early Hippocratic writings…’; she goes on to cite Lloyd's work, and draws∗ a telling parallel with the ‘confident rationalism of a Victorian scientist confuting a literal interpretation of the opening chapters of Genesis’.
302. D.M. Lewis, ‘Persians in Herodotus’, in The Greek historians. Literature and history, Festschrift A.E. Raubitschek (Saratoga 1985) 101–117.
303. Contrast Fehling 213 ff.: a very small amount of real historical information, he says, would account for Herodotos' narrative; he knew no more about the past than the rhapsodes knew about the Trojan War. At 243 ff. Fehling develops the view that Herodotos may have composed the whole work sitting in Athens, without ever having travelled anywhere.
304. Fehling 179 ff. For him, it seems, Herodotos must be a perfect positivist historian (a thing that never existed anyway) or no historian at all. Historians are still a cross between scientists and artists.
305. Cf. E. Will (n. 125) 121.
306. See J.A.S. Evans, Herodotus, explorer of the past (Princeton 1991) 105 f.
307. who also connects the passage on Ocean with the prologue; Erbse (n. 125) 183
308. cf. Donald Lateiner, The historical method of Herodotus (Toronto 1989) 41
309. K. Nickau, ‘Mythos und Logos bei Herodot’, in Memoria rerum veterum, Festschrift C.J. Classen (Stuttgart 1990) 83–100
310. Hunter (n. 70) 104 ff.
311. For a study of the thought-processes of $ see R.L. Fowler, The nature of early Greek lyric (Toronto 1987) ch. 2.
312. Hdt. ii 143.1
313. Hekataios FGrH 1 T 4.
314. Cf. Evans' review of Fehling (n. 125) 60
315. D. Asheri, Erodoto: he storie i2 (Fondazione Lorenzo Valla 1989) xxxviii
316. P. Vannicelli's book (n. 96), which develops the thesis that Herodotos' focus throughout his work is on the three generations preceding the Persian Wars.
317. Fehling 58.
318. Fehling 247.
319. See above p. 83; id. in A.R. Burn, Persia and the Greeks2 (London 1984) 597 ff.
320. id., Sparta and Persia (Leiden 1977) 12 ff.
321. cf. J. Diggle, Euripidea (Oxford 1994) 447.
322. With respect to Phoenicians, apart from the well known connection at Al Mina, note that Phoenicians and Greeks resided together at Pithekoussai from the mid-eighth century; see D. Ridgway, The First Western Greeks (Cambridge 1992) 111–118.
323. Hdt. vii 61
324. Hellanikos FGrH 4 F 60.
325. Kepheus father of Andromeda already in Hes. fr. 135 Merkelbach-West
326. Hdt. vii 61
327. Hellanikos FGrH 4 F59.
328. Fehling 118f.
329. Cf. Erbse (n. 125) 187 f. At vii 62 Herodotos says the Medes were named after Medeia–as the Medes themselves say.
330. Cf. Hek. FGrH 1 F 322
331. Hdt. ii 77.4.
332. Erbse, ‘Fiktion und Wahrheit’ (n. 125) 137 ff. is particularly cogent on this point, showing that the line reveals genuine historical thought, and is of a piece with many other examples of such thought in Herodotos. He also advances some reasons for thinking that the Persians really pushed this line about vengeance for the Trojan War as a kind of official propaganda.
333. Leonard E. Woodbury, ‘Poetry and publication: Theognis 769–772’, Collected writings, edd. C.G. Brown, R.L. Fowler, E. Robbins, P. Wallace Matheson (Atlanta 1991) 483–490.