THE MAKING OF HISTORY: HERODOTUS' HISTORIES APODEXIS

Brill's Companions to Classical Studies

Volumn , Issue , 2002, Pages 3-32

  Bakker, Egbert J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85171332208     PISSN: 18723357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1163/9789004217584_002     Document Type: Chapter

References (69)

1. Translations of passages from Herodotus in this chapter are my own.
2. Most authoritatively Jacoby (1913) 275 ff.; cf. De Sanctis (1926), Powell (1939), Latte (1958) 7 ('Er hat nicht als Historiker begonnen, sondern ist es geworden'); Fornara (197 la); an analytic reading of Herodotus' first sentence itself is offered in Hommel (1981).
3. E.g., Regenbogen (1930b); Pohlenz (1937), Immerwahr (1966), Cobet (1971), Drexler (1972). For the problem of unity in the Histories, see de Jong, this volume (Ch. 11).
4. E.g., Lang (1984); on 'oral strategies' in Herodotus, see also Slings, this volume (Ch. 3).
5. Evans (199 I) 3, Thomas (2000) 16 I ff See also the problem of Herodotus' 'reliability' as discussed by Cartledge and Greenwood in this volume (Ch. 15).
6. Krischer (1965) 159- 60; cf. Nagy (1990) 217, the latter analysing colon 3 as an indirect question; cf. Erbse (1956) 215, who analyses it as a relative clause (see also Lang (1987) 204); critical grammatical discussion in Drexler (I972) 3- I I. A different articulation of the sentence is presented in Hommel (1981) 277 ff. Erbse (1992) I23- 5 reviews the scholarship on the Proem, rightly pointing out that any attempt to see the Proem as announcing the content of the Histories is likely to create confusion.
7. Compare the proem of the Iliad, where I. 6 E~ oti
8. Krischer (1965) 160, Nagy (1987) 180; cf. Lateiner (1989) 15. The first epic parallel is the proem of the Iliad, in which the phrase lha.cr-c~'tTJV foicra.v'te 'the two of them stood away from each other quarrelling' in line 6 is picked up by Eptlh 'in quarrel' (8) in the beginning of the narrative.
9. For a different interpretation of the Proem, and of a.i'tiTJ in particular, see van Wees this volume (Ch. 14) p. 321.
10. ° Kennedy (1963) 64- 5; on the influence of sophistic rhetoric on Herodotus' style, see Jacoby (1913) 333; Aly (1921) 286- 96; general remarks in Lateiner (1989) 19.
11. E.g., 'performance ~iterally, 'display'] of the enquiries' (Gould (1989) 17); 'demonstration of his research' (Lateiner (1989) 7); 'public presentation' (Nagy (1990) 217); 'exposer son enquete' (Payen (1997) 82). the Ionian form for si~, is just as a nomen actionis derived from the verbal root 'show', 'display', 'point'. In Herodotus' Ionian, another verbal root, (for Attic 'receive', 'accept', yields in principle the same form (cf. (Hdt. 7.3.3)); aorist forms of either verb are also identical: from (ano)8dKVucr0m and from (es)otxoµm). Some scholars (most recently Rosen (1993)) actually go so far as to view as a form of which would turn Herodotus into a receiver of established tradition, rather than one who expounds original, individual research. See Erbse's (1995) reaction. Nagy (1987) 176 n. 3 speaks of a 'conflation' of the two verbs. See also the comments by Lang (1987) 203 and Nagy's reply ((1987) 209).
12. Evans (1991) 90, 99- 100, Thomas (1992) 125- 6; (1993); (2000) 257- 60 (see further below).
13. E.g., Lucian, Herodotus 1 (on Herodotus performing at the Olympic Games). Cf. Pohlenz (1937) 208, Powell (1939) 32 ff.; critical discussion in Johnson (1994).
14. Thomas (1993); (2000) 249 ff.; Lloyd (1979) 86- 98; see also Hornblower (1987) 20.
15. Cole (1991) 89.
16. Tr. Jones (1923) 191.
17. Thomas (2000) 262- 3; cf. (1993) 242- 43.
18. Nagy (1987) 175; (1990) 224, arguing on the basis of a parallelism of Myw,; (glossed as 'masters of speech', ibid. 223) and See also Hartog (1991) 285 (English tr. p. 276), referring to Havelock (1963) 53- 4 n. 8.
19. Nagy (1987) 178.
20. Ibid.; see also Erbse (1956) 211, who stresses the parallelism oficr1:0pi11,;un68e~1,; and i!pyoov un68e~t,;, on which, see further below, pages 24- 28.
21. E.g., Gould (1989) 17; Evans (1991) 3; Hartog (1991) 285; assessment of the 'orality' of the term in Moles (1999) sect. 8. It is worth pointing out that this whole discussion (including the controversy between Nagy and Thomas) suffers from a fundamental and persistent ambiguity in the use of the term 'oral', in that it refers both to the 'mentality' or 'conception' of a discourse ('oral' vs. 'literate') and to its mode of presentation ('oral' vs. 'written'). For discussion, see Bakker (1999a) 29- 37.
22. See, e.g., Pohlenz (1937) 208- 10; Lang (1984); Munson (1993).
23. Thomas (1993) 240- 1; Dewald (1987) 150 as well as Ch. 12 in this volume. Thomas uses the first-person verbs as an argument against the idea of the 'oral storyteller', who she thinks is much less present in the text. Signs of speaking in Homer, however, may be less straightforward, but they are unmistakable once noticed; see Bakker (1997a). Against Thomas' and Dewald's stance with regard to the first person in the Histories, see Svenbro (1993) 150, who approaches the first person in Herodotus and other historians as a necessary 'fiction'.
24. On beginning and end of sections, see Immerwahr (1966) 52- 8; Dewald (1987) 164- 5. The importance of the particles µev OT] ... OE in this process is demonstrated in Bakker (1993). On pointing backward and ahead, see also de Jong, this volume (Ch. 11) pp. 259- 263.
25. Three times a forward cross-reference remains unfulfilled. It is to be noted that in these cases Herodotus does not use ucr1:epov (2.101.2, referring to 2.149.1), but an explicit mention of Myot (I. I06.2 ev hlpotcrt Myoicrt, on the fall of Nineveh; 1.184 ev 'tOlÓl 'AcrcruptOtO'l Myotcrt, on the Babylonian kings; 7.213 ev 'tOlÓl omcr0e Myotcrt, on the death of the traitor Ephialtes). Are these references to parts of the work that were never written or to lectures that were never incorporated in the final redaction? Cf. Nagy (1990) 235 n. 91. See also Rosier, this volume (Ch. 4, note 17) and Cobet (Ch. 17, note 40).
26. Hornblower (1987) 8- 11. But see pages 31-32 at the end of this chapter.
27. Snell (1924) 59- 71, Nagy (1990) 250, Dewald (1987) 153 n. 18; Darbo-Peschanski (1987) 184 ('recherche sur le terrain'); Thomas (2000) 164.
28. Thomas (2000) 161- 7.
29. Nagy (1990) 259- 62.
30. E.g., De Caelo 298b2; Hist. an. 491a] 1- 12; lncessu an. 704b7- l l; Part. an. 646a8- 12; 696bl4- l7.
31. On ai1:tT] in Hippocratic and other contemporary texts, see also Sauge (1992) 257 ff., who stresses, even for scientific texts, the link with ahE'iv (8iKT]v) 'demand satisfaction (from an accused party)'. See further below, p. 18.
32. Attested usage of 'fo-1:rop/\'.crtrop: fl. 18.501, 23.486; Hes. W&D 792; Soph. E. 850; Plat. Grat. 406b3; Hipp. Oath 2 (it is ironic that the term should be used in the Hippocratic oath in this juridical sense). See also Nagy (1990) 250- 9. In Dewald (1987) 153 ff. the notion of histor is used metaphorically, as a narratological function: the authorial persona of the Histories; cf. her more recent views in Ch. 12, pp. 271- 2 below. See also Cartledge and Greenwood, this volume (Ch. 15 note 21).
33. E.g., the investigation of the Nile: l(JtOpECOV au1:0uc; t\vnva 8-uvaµtv fXEtONEt/\.0(;, 2.19.3; eAEyov ... µot .. . icrtopfovn, 2.113.1. Cf. already Pohlenz (1937) 44 ('die eigentliche icr1:0ptT],
34. On this passage, see also Sauge (1992) 252; on the next passage (2.99.1), see Cartledge and Greenwood, this volume (Ch. 15), p. 355.
35. Floyd (1990) 161. Floyd bases his objections to the traditional etymology primarily on the rough breathing on tcr'trop, \.cnop[a (which is not easy to harmonize with the verbal root Ft8-). As Rosen (1993) 146 n. 1 points out, however, the collocation of the suffix -'trop with a reduplicated present stem {´s-EtV (<*si-sd) is not without problems either.
36. 2.34.1 Eit' ocrov µm:pO'm'tOV lO''tOpEOV'ta ~v EStK!~crSm; 4.192.3 ocrov riµe'ic; tcr'topfov'tec; Eitt µm:p6'tmov oto[ 'tE i\yev6µe8m i\l;ucfoSm.
37. E.g., Dewald (1987); Connor (1993).
38. 1.3.2 a1tat'tEEtv tE 'EAEVT]V Kat 8iKapr\<; &.pm:xyi\<; ahEEtv. Cf. 2.118.3; 4.164.1; 8.114.1. On the relation between a\'.no<; and ahEw in this light, see also Sauge (1992) 257 ff., who goes as far as to gloss ahiri as 'demande de reparation' rather than 'cause'. ·
39. See also Dewald (1987) 169.
40. This negative phrase is significant in light of the formula yvcoµ11v anoMl;acr0m (rather than anocpaivrn0m); see note 47 below.
41. On this passage, see Jacoby (1913) 408- 9. See also 3.3.1; 3.9.2. See also Cartledge and Greenwood, this volume (Ch. 15, p. 356).
42. Thomas (2000) I76, with discussion of the passages cited. See also Darbo Peschanski (1987) 161.
43. E.g., ano-8i8roµt 'give back what is expected'; ano-Ka0icrtf\µt 'return what is due', 'restore'; ano-Aaµ~avro 'receive what is one's due', 'an-attEro 'demand back' (p. 18 above).
44. Russo (1997) 59.
45. 1.124.3; 1.125.2; 1.127.2; 1.162.2; 3.63.2; 4.167. I; 5.25.1; 5.25.2; 5.32; 5.32; 5.64.1; 5.83.3; 5.97.3; 5.99.2; 6.57.2; 6.94.2; 6.95.1; 7.2.1; 7.3.4; 7.4.1; 7.81.
46. Cf. Erbse (I 956) 209- 11.
47. 1.207.2; Notice 2.1 20.5; 3.71. 1; 7.882; 7.52.1; 7.143.3; 7.152.1; 8.49.1; 9.5.2) appears to be more neutral, and does not convey the same sense of controversy and conflict (the underlined examples represent Herodotus' own opinion; see also note 40 above).
48. In the two remaining instances, 2.146.1 and 8.8.3, the context is again conflict between accounts.
49. On the relation between icrwpi,i and yvffiµT], see also Sauge (1992) 11.
50. See also Erbse (1956) 211.
51. On epya µEyaAa (tE Kat 0wµacrta), see Raubitschek (1939).
52. Cf. 1.176.1; 7.23.3; 7.223.4. There is an instructive difference between 7.24 (2:epl;ri<;) t0e1ccov 'tE ouvaµtv CX1t00EtKVUcr0m Kal. µvriµ6cruva A.t1tfo0m and Thuc. 6.47. I £1tt8dl;avm<; ... TJ)V ouvaµtv Tll<; 'A0rivaicov 1t61cEco<; (cf. Thuc. 6.31.4): Xerxes wanted to prove his power by leaving a great achievement to posterity (see below), whereas the Athenians merely wanted to display their military force.
53. On µvriµ6cruva;\,mfo0m and its connection with anoot\~acr0m, see also Drexler (1972) 23- 5.
54. Also fl. 7.89-91, where he thinks of the tomb of one of his defeated opponents as a sign pointing to the past, Hector's glorious present; see also Cobet (Ch. 17) and Boedeker (Ch. 5), this volume (p. 389 and p. 99, resp.), as well as Bakker (1997a) 165- 6; (1997b) 33. On Herodotus and epic intentions, see also Erbse (1992) 122. Within Herodotus' narrative, cf. 6.109.3, 7.220.2.
55. See also Pelliccia (1992) 74 n. 23.
56. This happens in the Histories at 9.72.2, where Callicrates, in truly Homeric manner 'the most beautiful man in the Greek camp', died without having been able to accomplish (anoMl;ao0m) a great deed; ironically, he does get his kleos, in the framework of Herodotus' apodexis. On this passage, see also Nagy (I987) 178.
57. On el;hT1Aa, see Moles (1999) sect. 8, who argues that this term creates an 'inscriptional' atmosphere, either in its genealogical sense of 'extinct' (cf. 5.39.2), which points to funerary monuments, or in the sense of 'fading', which would contrast the durability of Herodotus' work with the transient nature of material artifacts. On the Proem as an inscription, see pages 29-32 below.
58. See also Darbo-Peschanski (1987) 162, Boedeker, this volume, Ch. 5, p. 100.
59. One may wonder whether Herodotus was aware of the parallel with Telemachus, who set out on a voyage to inquire after the kleos of his father (Od. 3.82), to win kleos himself in the process (Od. 1.95).
60. On 'writing', see also the contribution of Rosier (Ch. 4) to this volume.
61. As in the common formula to introduce direct speech EA£YE 'tCXOE 'spoke as follows', e.g., 1.11.2; 1.36.2, etc.; or the cases where oOE, used preclicatively, refers ahead to the content of, e.g., a yvroµri, e.g., 1.132.1; 2.17.4; 2.17, etc. Cf. Kuhner-Gerth (1898- 1904) 1: 646. See also de Jong, this volume (Ch. 11), p. 259.
62. Thus, Herodotus can present things as close to himself and his public, e.g., l. l. 1 TT)VOE TT]V 0aA.acrcmv 'this sea', as opposed to the Red Sea mentioned just before; 2.106.4; 4.118.1,17voE TTJV J11tEtpov, as opposed to,1111ndpcp,i\ hepn (it is not necessary to take this use of the deictic as a trace of oral delivery of the work; it seems preferable to see the deictic as uttered within the deictic centre of the Greeks, regardless of a specific moment). For the link between oOE and the first grammatical person, see, e.g., oOE wt napEtµt as uttered by young Cyrus before Astyages (Hdt. 1.115.3); cf. Svenbro (1993) 33 ff. (see note 63) and Bakker (1999b) 10 on Hesiod's self-presentation at Th. 24.
63. On the future orientation of the Histories, see also Rosier (Ch. 4, this volume).
64. For this idea, see now Moles (1999), with extensive discussion also of Thucydides 1.21- 22 in this connection, and, earlier, Svenbro (1993) 149- 50; focussing on the author's referring to himself in the third person as a 'monumental' way of saying.
65. In other words, the monument is 'speaking' of itself in the third person. See Svenbro (1993) 26- 34, who argues that this deictic orientation was preceded by an 'ego-centric' phase, in which the monument 'spoke' in the first person, with the transition point somewhere around the middle of the 6th cent. BCE. A simple example is the dedicatory epigram cited by Thucydides (6.54): µvfjµa,68' ~<; apxil<; TIEtcricr,pam; 'Inniou ut6<; I811KEV 'AnoA.A.oovo<; Tiu0iou EV,EµevEt.
66. Theogn. 22- 3 (cf. 20: -ro"icro' enemv).
67. On Herodotus' future-oriented stance, see also Connor (1987) 258, Lateiner (1989) 5n8 as well as Raaflaub, this volume (Ch. 7). For the opposite view that Herodotus is not interested in reaching beyond his immediate audience (Thucydides' supposed hint at 1.22.4, but see below), see, e.g., Fornara (I97 la) 60.
68. Moles (1999) section 4 discusses K'tf\µa as 'monument'. The future orientation of Thucydides' undertaking is also apparent in the aorist verb (0ou1Cuoifov;) ~uveypa\jfEV, which occurs in the Proem as well as in the recurrent formula for the end of a year (Th. 2.103.2, etc.): the verb '(Thucydides) has written' implies the time of a reader in the future, see Bakker (1997d) 30.
69. Johnson (I994) 232- 8; citation p. 233. Johnson notes that in Thucydides the term aycovtcrµa usually means the glory that results from a notable achievement; the term is used (7.56.2) to represent the Syracusans' own characterization of their victory over the Athenians.