Showing posts with label Herodotus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Herodotus. Show all posts
Friday, May 16, 2014
What the Ancients Can Teach Us About War
Sometimes people ask me what I've learned from the Great Books. One (surprising) thing is that I've become less hawkish towards war. The ancient Greeks (whether intentional or not) showed that war turns out awful for pretty much everyone. Of course, it has its place, but when we do the cost/benefit analysis, we have to remember that the cost is pretty damn dire.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Go to War?
A while ago I was asked if this reading list has led me to any big pops of understanding. I answered that I'd begun to see just how important the idea of challenging the status quo has been. Another idea occurred to me though. Quite a bit of what we've read so far has dealt with the terrible costs of war. Think of what we've gotten from the Greeks:
Some of this is simply timing. Quite a bit of the classic Greek works were written during the Peloponnesian war. It understandably dominated the thinking of the time. But all the same, these are foundational works of Western thought. You could very easily read some of the greats and come away anti-war.
At the very least, this reading has put some caution into my thoughts on the subject. Not that I was rabidly pro-war before. (In fact, the rabid pro-war person is more of a caricature than an actual representation.) But my ideas of the costs and benefits have changed. My threshold for supporting war is much higher than it was before.
- Aristophanes - Lysistrata talks about how hard war is on the women at home.
- Homer - The Iliad shows that the Trojan war was pretty much a disaster for all involved.
- Aeschylus - A continuation of the tragedies of the Trojan war. Agamemnon's family was simply shredded in the aftermath.
- Herodotus - The parts of the History we read mainly dwells on the follies of various Persian leaders. Spoilers: they didn't do well.
- Thucydides - The Peloponnesian war was terrible for pretty much every part of Greece.
Some of this is simply timing. Quite a bit of the classic Greek works were written during the Peloponnesian war. It understandably dominated the thinking of the time. But all the same, these are foundational works of Western thought. You could very easily read some of the greats and come away anti-war.
At the very least, this reading has put some caution into my thoughts on the subject. Not that I was rabidly pro-war before. (In fact, the rabid pro-war person is more of a caricature than an actual representation.) But my ideas of the costs and benefits have changed. My threshold for supporting war is much higher than it was before.
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Where Are the Gods? - Herodotus
It's interesting reading through a progression of Greek writers. In the past year we've read through Homer's telling of the Trojan war, Herodotus and the Persians and coming up, Thucydides and the Peloponnesian war. There is a rather big change from Homer to Herodotus and then the big T.
Homer's telling of war was completely driven by the gods. They planned the war, they picked out who would die and often helped them on their way. The gods even fought over how to kill off the survivors. In Homer's world, the gods stood in for fate and decided who would make it out alive.
Herodotus is much less into the divine. His stories are driven by great people and the decisions they make. He does emphasize messages from oracles. They're conduits of the gods but we no longer have any insight into the motives behind fated actions.
Thucydides writes about war in an almost modern fashion. Decisions are made solely by people and battles are won or lost based on who was best prepared and best led. He mentions phrases from oracles only in the way that they might have matched events. He also mentions temples and shrines but only to show the respect that people paid to them. His is a history in which other people have custom and possibly belief, but you couldn't prove that he has either.
Homer's telling of war was completely driven by the gods. They planned the war, they picked out who would die and often helped them on their way. The gods even fought over how to kill off the survivors. In Homer's world, the gods stood in for fate and decided who would make it out alive.
Herodotus is much less into the divine. His stories are driven by great people and the decisions they make. He does emphasize messages from oracles. They're conduits of the gods but we no longer have any insight into the motives behind fated actions.
Thucydides writes about war in an almost modern fashion. Decisions are made solely by people and battles are won or lost based on who was best prepared and best led. He mentions phrases from oracles only in the way that they might have matched events. He also mentions temples and shrines but only to show the respect that people paid to them. His is a history in which other people have custom and possibly belief, but you couldn't prove that he has either.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
The Fleets! - Herodotus
And we're on to book VIII, which mostly deals with the battle between the Persian and Greek fleets. You may remember that Xerxes was warned that his large fleet would be vulnerable because there was no safe harbor that it could shelter in if there was bad weather. That warning proved to be prophetic, as a storm wiped out about 200 of them.
Meanwhile the Athenians evacuated Athens. The Persians quickly sent in a land force and destroyed the town. I had no idea that this had happened. In fact, while I'm talking about it, cities were fairly routinely sacked and rebuilt in this era. (Parts of Thucydides read like a game of Go Fish played with cities instead of cards.) I don't know if this speaks to the more primitive construction of that time or if invading armies were more gentle than our own era of total warfare. Maybe a combination of the two?
The battle of the fleets is a bit difficult to work out. I wish I'd read it from the Landmark edition. That would have helped. Anyway, the Greek forces were better organized and had more clear purpose. They were able to sow some confusion and distrust among the invasion force, in part because the Persians had triremes from neighbors that they couldn't completely trust. In any case, the Greeks won and won decisively.
One very interesting character in this section, is a Persian Queen named Artemisia. She commanded a ship during the battle and was seen favorably. She also gave Xerxes the advice to personally retreat back to Persia and keep a remaining army in place to finish off the war. Xerxes followed this advice.
Meanwhile the Athenians evacuated Athens. The Persians quickly sent in a land force and destroyed the town. I had no idea that this had happened. In fact, while I'm talking about it, cities were fairly routinely sacked and rebuilt in this era. (Parts of Thucydides read like a game of Go Fish played with cities instead of cards.) I don't know if this speaks to the more primitive construction of that time or if invading armies were more gentle than our own era of total warfare. Maybe a combination of the two?
The battle of the fleets is a bit difficult to work out. I wish I'd read it from the Landmark edition. That would have helped. Anyway, the Greek forces were better organized and had more clear purpose. They were able to sow some confusion and distrust among the invasion force, in part because the Persians had triremes from neighbors that they couldn't completely trust. In any case, the Greeks won and won decisively.
One very interesting character in this section, is a Persian Queen named Artemisia. She commanded a ship during the battle and was seen favorably. She also gave Xerxes the advice to personally retreat back to Persia and keep a remaining army in place to finish off the war. Xerxes followed this advice.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Thermopylae - Herodotus
Three books from Herodotus, the last three of his History, and all of them are about the great Greco-Persian war. I'll tackle each one in a different post.
Our story starts out with the Persian king Xerxes (apparently husband to the Bible's Esther), deciding to go out and conquer the Hellenes, today known as the Greeks. Persia was the super power of its day and Xerxes was confident he could amass enough men and a large enough fleet to reduce those haughty Greeks. His first challenge was to create a bridge over the Hellespont so that his army could march from what is modern day Turkey. They would then simply walk around the Aegean sea and fight it out. The bridge was made but then a problem happened. From Herodotus:
There are two main paths into Greece from the north. One of them was cut off by flooding so the Persians were forced to take a route along the eastern coast. This path leads up to a bottle neck near some hot springs at a place called Hot Gates or Thermopylae. A coalition of the Greek city states decided that this would be the best place to delay Xerxes.
The Spartans took command and their king, Leonidas, led 300 of his men to hold onto the bottleneck. (They had some small support from other cities and from Spartan helots. So the overall number was something like 4000, but let's not step on the legend too much.) These men sealed up the passage and the Persians couldn't easily displace them.
For two days, the Persians tried and tried but they couldn't knock them out. Then, a Greek man named Ephialtes, told the Persians of a path that they could use to outflank the Spartans. They did this on the third day. The Greeks retreated to a hill and were subsequently slaughtered by arrows.
This is one of those important myths in Western history. The idea is that a small force of men voluntarily gave up their lives so that their comrades could organize a defense. I don't know what the counter-factuals suggest would have happened without that delay but in the end it doesn't matter. The story is what's important.
Our story starts out with the Persian king Xerxes (apparently husband to the Bible's Esther), deciding to go out and conquer the Hellenes, today known as the Greeks. Persia was the super power of its day and Xerxes was confident he could amass enough men and a large enough fleet to reduce those haughty Greeks. His first challenge was to create a bridge over the Hellespont so that his army could march from what is modern day Turkey. They would then simply walk around the Aegean sea and fight it out. The bridge was made but then a problem happened. From Herodotus:
But when the strait had been bridged over, a great storm came on and dashed together all the work that had been made and broke it up. Then when Xerxes heard it he was exceedingly enraged, and bade them scourge the Hellespont with three hundred strokes of the lash and let down into the sea a pair of fetters. Nay, I have heard further that he sent branders also with them to brand the Hellespont.I love that picture, don't you? Herodotus tells such wonderful stories! While his armies were marching Xerxes came into contact with a man named Artabanos who warned him that he was going into danger. He told him that his large army was a danger to itself as it wouldn't be able to last long without constant supply. He also warned that the large Persian fleet was in danger because it wouldn't have a single friendly harbor it could go to if there were storms. Xerxes went on anyway.
There are two main paths into Greece from the north. One of them was cut off by flooding so the Persians were forced to take a route along the eastern coast. This path leads up to a bottle neck near some hot springs at a place called Hot Gates or Thermopylae. A coalition of the Greek city states decided that this would be the best place to delay Xerxes.
The Spartans took command and their king, Leonidas, led 300 of his men to hold onto the bottleneck. (They had some small support from other cities and from Spartan helots. So the overall number was something like 4000, but let's not step on the legend too much.) These men sealed up the passage and the Persians couldn't easily displace them.
For two days, the Persians tried and tried but they couldn't knock them out. Then, a Greek man named Ephialtes, told the Persians of a path that they could use to outflank the Spartans. They did this on the third day. The Greeks retreated to a hill and were subsequently slaughtered by arrows.
This is one of those important myths in Western history. The idea is that a small force of men voluntarily gave up their lives so that their comrades could organize a defense. I don't know what the counter-factuals suggest would have happened without that delay but in the end it doesn't matter. The story is what's important.
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Landmark Herodotus and Thucydides
I want to pass on a format recommendation for reading Herodotus and Thucydides. There are Landmark versions of both that are simply wonderful. I got the Landmark Thucydides from the library and it has made understanding the writing much simpler.
Each page has a header that keeps track of which year and season of the war is taking place. There are footnotes that connect the readings to other places within the Peloponnessian War. Each paragraph has a summary statement in case the meanings are confusing. There are also essays and indexes in the back to give more background, but I haven't dug into any of those yet.
And best of all, there are maps every few pages to help the reader place all of the mentioned cities and regions! This is crucial to understanding something as geographically driven as a war. I with I'd read Herodotus with the Landmark to keep clear where the battles were taking place.
If you're keeping up with the reading list or just stumbled upon this post from Google, I can't recommend these books too highly.
Each page has a header that keeps track of which year and season of the war is taking place. There are footnotes that connect the readings to other places within the Peloponnessian War. Each paragraph has a summary statement in case the meanings are confusing. There are also essays and indexes in the back to give more background, but I haven't dug into any of those yet.
And best of all, there are maps every few pages to help the reader place all of the mentioned cities and regions! This is crucial to understanding something as geographically driven as a war. I with I'd read Herodotus with the Landmark to keep clear where the battles were taking place.
If you're keeping up with the reading list or just stumbled upon this post from Google, I can't recommend these books too highly.
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Greek Timeline
I'd normally put up biographies of Aeschylus and Herodotus but I did that last year. You can find Aeschylus here and Herodotus here. Last year I wrote that it was important to have a feel for the overall contemporary history of this period and I still think that's true. So I'll just reproduce the timeline that I made then.
There were three different wars that pictured the ancient Greek worldview and it's useful to put the various writers in context of those wars. (As future historians learn about the 20th century, they'll need to be very aware of both world wars and the Vietnam war. Same deal.)
Trojan War - (Sometime in the 1200s or 1100s BC) This was the legendary war that provided so many stories of heroism and courage. The Greeks wrote and sung about the happenings of this war for centuries.
Homer - (850 BC?) The Homeric epics cemented the Trojan war and its aftermath in Greek storytelling.
Aeschylus - (525 - 456 BC) Wrote about Agamemnon's return from the wars and the ensuing bloodbath.
Greco/Persian wars - (499 - 449 BC) Notably, this started with a Greek adventure into Persian territory. The Persians counter-invaded in 492 and the incredibly influential battle of Marathon happened in 490. Two generations of Greeks lived with the reality of war with the Persian empire.
(Battle of Thermopylae 480 BC) A battle within the greater Greco/Persian war.
Herodotus (484 - 425 BC) - Both men grew up in the wars. It's notable that Herodotus traveled extensively during this whole period. When he wrote about the conflict with Persia, he undoubtedly talked with veterans and contemporaries.
Socrates (469 - 399 BC) - Grew up as the wars were winding down. Was in his late 30's when the next war really heated up.
Thucydides (460 - 395 BC) - Was alive as an adult during the whole of the Peloponnesian War.
Peloponnesian War (431 - 404 BC) - This war had many phases, but the most important for this timeline is that Athens was completely humbled by the end. We're set to read Thucydides on this subject next year.
Plato (428 - 348 BC) - Grew up during the long fight with Sparta. His adulthood was mostly in the post-war era.
Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) - Lived entirely after the wars. By this time Athens was no longer had an empire nor a world power.
There were three different wars that pictured the ancient Greek worldview and it's useful to put the various writers in context of those wars. (As future historians learn about the 20th century, they'll need to be very aware of both world wars and the Vietnam war. Same deal.)
Trojan War - (Sometime in the 1200s or 1100s BC) This was the legendary war that provided so many stories of heroism and courage. The Greeks wrote and sung about the happenings of this war for centuries.
Homer - (850 BC?) The Homeric epics cemented the Trojan war and its aftermath in Greek storytelling.
Aeschylus - (525 - 456 BC) Wrote about Agamemnon's return from the wars and the ensuing bloodbath.
Greco/Persian wars - (499 - 449 BC) Notably, this started with a Greek adventure into Persian territory. The Persians counter-invaded in 492 and the incredibly influential battle of Marathon happened in 490. Two generations of Greeks lived with the reality of war with the Persian empire.
(Battle of Thermopylae 480 BC) A battle within the greater Greco/Persian war.
Herodotus (484 - 425 BC) - Both men grew up in the wars. It's notable that Herodotus traveled extensively during this whole period. When he wrote about the conflict with Persia, he undoubtedly talked with veterans and contemporaries.
Socrates (469 - 399 BC) - Grew up as the wars were winding down. Was in his late 30's when the next war really heated up.
Thucydides (460 - 395 BC) - Was alive as an adult during the whole of the Peloponnesian War.
Peloponnesian War (431 - 404 BC) - This war had many phases, but the most important for this timeline is that Athens was completely humbled by the end. We're set to read Thucydides on this subject next year.
Plato (428 - 348 BC) - Grew up during the long fight with Sparta. His adulthood was mostly in the post-war era.
Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) - Lived entirely after the wars. By this time Athens was no longer had an empire nor a world power.
Wednesday, January 1, 2014
Friday, December 20, 2013
Saturday, March 30, 2013
The Story of the Thief - Herodotus
Deep in book two of Herodotus' writings, there is the story of an Egyptian thief that is wonderful. I'd never heard it before so I want to share it here. (This is my paraphrase, the actual account can be read in section 121 of book two.)
There was a very wealthy king who needed a treasure room built. A builder was found and the king stored all of his riches there. When the builder was close to death, he told his two sons that there was a secret entrance that they could use to steal from the king. The sons began to steal from the king on a nightly basis.
The king soon realized that he was losing his treasure but he couldn't figure out how it was happening. The seals on the room were unbroken. Finally the king set up traps in the vault, to catch the thieves. The brothers entered and one was quickly caught.
The one that was caught quickly figured out that their family would be destroyed if he was found there so he had his brother cut off his head(!) so that the crime couldn't be traced back to them. According to Herodotus "to the other it seemed that he spoke well, and he was persuaded and did so; and fitting the stone into its place he departed home bearing with him the head of his brother".
The next day the kind found the headless body in the vault. He couldn't identify it so he had it hung up outside the vault so that he could seize anyone who came to grieve over it. The mother of the two brothers was very upset and she told the remaining brother that he must get the body back or she would tell the king everything that had happened.
So the brother got some asses and skins of wine. When he approached the guards and the body of his brother, he caused the skins to start to spill wine. The guards rushed out to get some of the wine. The brother became friends with them and gave them more and more wine. Eventually the guards were drunk and he was able to take his brothers body.
The king was livid and schemed to find a way to find the thief. He finally decided that his own daughter would offer herself up to any man that wanted her, but only on the condition that the man first tell the daughter 'the most cunning and most unholy deed they had done'. If the thief came, she would hold on to him until guards could take him.
The thief couldn't resist getting the better of the king so he found a freshly dead body and cut off one arm. This he held in his sleeve. He went to the daughter and admitted everything. She grabbed for him and only got the dead arm while the thief ran away.
The king thought back on everything that had happened and decided that he would pardon the thief and give him a great reward if he'd come to the king. The thief did so and the king had him marry his daughter.
Isn't that an amazing story? I can see the bare bones of a movie in it right away. Somewhat amazingly, at no time does Herodotus give the thief a name.
There was a very wealthy king who needed a treasure room built. A builder was found and the king stored all of his riches there. When the builder was close to death, he told his two sons that there was a secret entrance that they could use to steal from the king. The sons began to steal from the king on a nightly basis.
The king soon realized that he was losing his treasure but he couldn't figure out how it was happening. The seals on the room were unbroken. Finally the king set up traps in the vault, to catch the thieves. The brothers entered and one was quickly caught.
The one that was caught quickly figured out that their family would be destroyed if he was found there so he had his brother cut off his head(!) so that the crime couldn't be traced back to them. According to Herodotus "to the other it seemed that he spoke well, and he was persuaded and did so; and fitting the stone into its place he departed home bearing with him the head of his brother".
The next day the kind found the headless body in the vault. He couldn't identify it so he had it hung up outside the vault so that he could seize anyone who came to grieve over it. The mother of the two brothers was very upset and she told the remaining brother that he must get the body back or she would tell the king everything that had happened.
So the brother got some asses and skins of wine. When he approached the guards and the body of his brother, he caused the skins to start to spill wine. The guards rushed out to get some of the wine. The brother became friends with them and gave them more and more wine. Eventually the guards were drunk and he was able to take his brothers body.
The king was livid and schemed to find a way to find the thief. He finally decided that his own daughter would offer herself up to any man that wanted her, but only on the condition that the man first tell the daughter 'the most cunning and most unholy deed they had done'. If the thief came, she would hold on to him until guards could take him.
The thief couldn't resist getting the better of the king so he found a freshly dead body and cut off one arm. This he held in his sleeve. He went to the daughter and admitted everything. She grabbed for him and only got the dead arm while the thief ran away.
The king thought back on everything that had happened and decided that he would pardon the thief and give him a great reward if he'd come to the king. The thief did so and the king had him marry his daughter.
Isn't that an amazing story? I can see the bare bones of a movie in it right away. Somewhat amazingly, at no time does Herodotus give the thief a name.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Egyptian Science - Herodotus
The second book of Herodotus deals with Egypt. Of particular interest to me, were a couple of sections dealing with science. One of the early Egyptian kings (Pharaoh?), Psammetichos, wanted to find out if the Egyptians were the first people or not. He decided to do this through linguistics.
Obviously there are some ethical issues with taking children away and doing experiments with them, but set that aside. The king tried to create a sterile experiment so that he could find a true result. And when that result came out in favor a different people, he still allowed that result to be known.
Herodotus also mentions Egyptian astronomy. They were the first people to calculate the year, having twelve months of 30 days with five extra days. Herodotus says this was better than the Hellenic manner where extra months were needed to make it all come out right. (Bonus question: why are months standardized at 30 days?)
Herodotus also questioned the source of the Nile. He knew that rivers usually (always?) start with melted snow. He disregarded this option for the Nile since it flowed from the desert where there was no snow. Of course we now know that it simply flows through the Sahara and starts quite a bit south of there. The source wasn't found for more than two millennia later so I don't mean that as any kind of criticism. It's hard not to be impressed with how he grappled with the problem and tried to solve it.
Taking two new-born children belonging to persons of the common sort he gave them to a shepherd to bring up at the place where his flocks were, with a manner of bringing up such as I shall say, charging him namely that no man should utter any word in their presence, and that they should be placed by themselves in a room where none might come . . .They would be fed and otherwise cared for but no one would talk to them. Psammetichos wanted to hear what the first words would be from the children. After a couple of years, the children started saying 'bekos'. When this was reported to the king, some effort was made to find out if that was a word in any language. It was discovered that 'bekos' meant 'bread' to the Phrygians and they were declared the earliest people.
Obviously there are some ethical issues with taking children away and doing experiments with them, but set that aside. The king tried to create a sterile experiment so that he could find a true result. And when that result came out in favor a different people, he still allowed that result to be known.
Herodotus also mentions Egyptian astronomy. They were the first people to calculate the year, having twelve months of 30 days with five extra days. Herodotus says this was better than the Hellenic manner where extra months were needed to make it all come out right. (Bonus question: why are months standardized at 30 days?)
Herodotus also questioned the source of the Nile. He knew that rivers usually (always?) start with melted snow. He disregarded this option for the Nile since it flowed from the desert where there was no snow. Of course we now know that it simply flows through the Sahara and starts quite a bit south of there. The source wasn't found for more than two millennia later so I don't mean that as any kind of criticism. It's hard not to be impressed with how he grappled with the problem and tried to solve it.
Saturday, March 23, 2013
Croesus and the Oracles
Book one of Herodotus' history deals with the Persians. My favorite bit has to do with king Croesus. He meets Solon, a wandering Greek and asks him:
Over the past few months I've gotten a kick out of the appearances of the Oracle of Delphi (and others). The oracles have been guest stars in just about everything we've read so far this year. Our lead man, Croesus, decides to test the various oracles of the Mediterranean region. He sends his men out, telling them to carefully count the days as they go. Then, at the appointed time, they ask the Oracle what Croesus is doing right then. These answers were written down and sent back to him, so he could judge the quality of the visions. Only the Oracle at Delphi got it right.
So he sent many gifts to Delphi and and asked them if he should go to war against the Persians. They told him that 'if he should march against the Persians he should destroy a great empire'. Modern readers would understand the danger in the ambiguity of such phrasing but Croesus went right past it. The mighty empire, was of course, his own.
There was an oracle story that I'd never heard before, too. In the wars, a man took refuge from the Persians in a town called Kyme. The town people asked the Oracle if they should give him up or not and they said that they should. One of the townspeople, a man named Aristodicos, disagreed and he went to the Oracle asked again. They gave him the same answer so he decided to tear things up. He destroyed the nests of the sparrows that were sacred to the Oracle. The Oracle was aghast and asked why he would force away those, the Oracle would protect.
I've tried to think of any modern equivalent to the Oracles and I can't really think of any. My wife says that the internet now fills that niche but I'm not convinced.
Athenian guest, much report of thee has come to us, both in regard to thy wisdom and thy wanderings, how that in thy search for wisdom thou has traversed many lands to see them; now therefore a desire has come upon me to ask thee whether thou hast seen any whom thou deemest to be of all men the most happy.This was Croesus attempt to fish for a compliment. The gods, of course, saw it as a big Smite Me sign on his back. And smite him they did. He launched an unwise war and was reduced to being a prisoner of the enemy. At least he gets some wisdom out of the deal, as the opposing king Cyrus tells him:
For no one is so senseless as to choose of his own will war rather than peace, since in peace the sons bury their fathers, but in war the fathers bury their sons.I've thought about that statement quite a bit now that we're near the tenth anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq war.
Over the past few months I've gotten a kick out of the appearances of the Oracle of Delphi (and others). The oracles have been guest stars in just about everything we've read so far this year. Our lead man, Croesus, decides to test the various oracles of the Mediterranean region. He sends his men out, telling them to carefully count the days as they go. Then, at the appointed time, they ask the Oracle what Croesus is doing right then. These answers were written down and sent back to him, so he could judge the quality of the visions. Only the Oracle at Delphi got it right.
So he sent many gifts to Delphi and and asked them if he should go to war against the Persians. They told him that 'if he should march against the Persians he should destroy a great empire'. Modern readers would understand the danger in the ambiguity of such phrasing but Croesus went right past it. The mighty empire, was of course, his own.
There was an oracle story that I'd never heard before, too. In the wars, a man took refuge from the Persians in a town called Kyme. The town people asked the Oracle if they should give him up or not and they said that they should. One of the townspeople, a man named Aristodicos, disagreed and he went to the Oracle asked again. They gave him the same answer so he decided to tear things up. He destroyed the nests of the sparrows that were sacred to the Oracle. The Oracle was aghast and asked why he would force away those, the Oracle would protect.
And Aristodicos, it is said, not being at all at a loss for words replied to this: "Lord, doest thou thus come to the assistance of they suppliants, and yet biddest the men of Kyme deliver up theirs?" and the god answered him again thus: "Yea, I bid you to do so, that ye may perish the more quickly for your impiety; so that ye may not at any future time come to the Oracle to ask about deliver up of the suppliants."That's pretty cold blooded.
I've tried to think of any modern equivalent to the Oracles and I can't really think of any. My wife says that the internet now fills that niche but I'm not convinced.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Herodotus
Herodotus opens his writing with this mission statement:
The great thing about his approach is that he recognizes that some of what he has been told is true, and some isn't. He sifts through these categories and shares his judgment with the reader. If there are differing versions of stories, he'll mention that. In fact, Herodotus had actually traveled to several places and he uses first hand knowledge in his writings.
All of these things set the template for the writing of history. Modern historians will listen to ancient stories as a starting point, but then they work to figure out what the truth is. They'll study conflicting records and travel to locations to unearth evidence. They'll also maintain a level of skepticism until they have proof. All of this follows the discipline that Herodotus set down.
This is the Showing forth of the Inquiry of Herodotus of Halicarnassos, to the end that neither the deeds of men may be fortotten by lapse of time, nor the works grat and marvellous, which have been produced by Hellenes and some by Barbarians, may lose their renown; and especially that the causes may be remembered for which these waged war with one another.In other words, he is bound to record what has happend so that future peoples would know and not forget. He will write about both the Greeks and the non-Greeks and he will give special focus to the causes of war. In short, he will write history.
The great thing about his approach is that he recognizes that some of what he has been told is true, and some isn't. He sifts through these categories and shares his judgment with the reader. If there are differing versions of stories, he'll mention that. In fact, Herodotus had actually traveled to several places and he uses first hand knowledge in his writings.
All of these things set the template for the writing of history. Modern historians will listen to ancient stories as a starting point, but then they work to figure out what the truth is. They'll study conflicting records and travel to locations to unearth evidence. They'll also maintain a level of skepticism until they have proof. All of this follows the discipline that Herodotus set down.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Herodotus and the English Patient
I'm sure that I first learned about Herodotus in high school, though I don't remember anything other than that he was 'the father of history'. The next time I encountered him was in 1997, in the movie 'The English Patient'. For those who haven't seen the movie, the title character was a desert explorer whose plane was shot down over the Sahara during World War II. He is horribly burned and can't remember who he is. He has no identification and the only belonging of his that survived the plane crash is a copy of Herodotus that he carried with him. The movie is told in the present and also in flashback and here is the scene that got to me:
What an interesting story! You have a king who plays a silly trick, without any thought to the consequences on his adviser and his queen. The queen finds out the truth and gives the adviser, Gyges, a choice that will literally shake the kingdom.
Years later I actually picked up Herodotus to read and was surprised that this is the first story out of the gate. It only seems proper then, to start writing about the Father of History from this standpoint. He was, first and foremost, a teller of interesting stories. In between the most interesting stuff he also works to provide the actual nuts and bolts of things like who ruled and for how long, but it is the stories that most captivate.
So what do we learn here? Candaules is the king. He speaks at length of the beauty of his wife and finally orders Gyges to spy on her, so he too can affirm what the king is saying. This one simple jest leads to the loss of his life and throne. Lesson: don't treat your wife poorly. That lesson is tempered a bit by the fact that Herodotus doesn't actually name the queen. In later sections, he talks quite a bit about specific women, so the best guess is that he simply didn't know it.
It's easy to see how he captivated an audience.
What an interesting story! You have a king who plays a silly trick, without any thought to the consequences on his adviser and his queen. The queen finds out the truth and gives the adviser, Gyges, a choice that will literally shake the kingdom.
Years later I actually picked up Herodotus to read and was surprised that this is the first story out of the gate. It only seems proper then, to start writing about the Father of History from this standpoint. He was, first and foremost, a teller of interesting stories. In between the most interesting stuff he also works to provide the actual nuts and bolts of things like who ruled and for how long, but it is the stories that most captivate.
So what do we learn here? Candaules is the king. He speaks at length of the beauty of his wife and finally orders Gyges to spy on her, so he too can affirm what the king is saying. This one simple jest leads to the loss of his life and throne. Lesson: don't treat your wife poorly. That lesson is tempered a bit by the fact that Herodotus doesn't actually name the queen. In later sections, he talks quite a bit about specific women, so the best guess is that he simply didn't know it.
It's easy to see how he captivated an audience.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Biography of Herodotus
We don't know much about the life of Herodotus. He was born in 484 BC in Halicarnassus, a town in modern day Turkey. He is well known as the 'father of history', though apparently some of his contemporaries called him the 'father of lies'. They thought that he was in the wrong for relying so much on stories from other people.
He traveled extensively and talked with people everywhere he went. Herodotus then recorded these stories, weighed the evidence, and gave them to his audience. He often stressed the moments when he had conflicting tales, which gives tremendous credibility to what he speaks of.
Wikipedia gives this wonderful anecdote:
He traveled extensively and talked with people everywhere he went. Herodotus then recorded these stories, weighed the evidence, and gave them to his audience. He often stressed the moments when he had conflicting tales, which gives tremendous credibility to what he speaks of.
Wikipedia gives this wonderful anecdote:
It was conventional in Herodotus's day for authors to 'publish' their works by reciting them at popular festivals. According to Lucian, Herodotus took his finished work straight from Asia Minor to the Olympic Games and read the entire Histories to the assembled spectators in one sitting, receiving rapturous applause at the end of it. According to a very different account by an ancient grammarian, Herodotus refused to begin reading his work at the festival of Olympia until some clouds offered him a bit of shade, by which time however the assembly had dispersed - thus the proverbial expression "Herodotus and his shade" to describe any man who misses his opportunity through delay. Herodotus's recitation at Olympia was a favourite theme among ancient writers and there is another interesting variation on the story to be found in the Suda, Photius and Tzetzes, in which a young Thucydides happened to be in the assembly with his father and burst into tears during the recital, whereupon Herodotus observed prophetically to the boy's father: "Thy son's soul yearns for knowledge."I simply love the idea of going to the Olympics and reciting your works. I hope some new writer makes this method succeed again.
Friday, March 1, 2013
March Reading
The reading for March is
Herodotus: The History (books 1 and 2) link
He's the father of history and his work is exceedingly readable.
Herodotus: The History (books 1 and 2) link
He's the father of history and his work is exceedingly readable.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)