Nagle 1

Natasha Nagle
Herodotus and His World
Professor Larson
22 April 2015

A Willow in the Wind

The past is not a foreign entity carved in stone, it is like the supple branches of a willow
tree. Bending in the breezes and gales which generations of humanity have subjected it to; it is
flexible, yet sturdy and graceful. It holds humanitys greatest teacher and foe within its grasp. It
is subject to change, and yet it creates fortifications within whose patchwork walls the empire of
mankind protects itself, masking swirling patterns of complex thoughts, wonderments, and
deceits.
Lifes great tapestry is woven of shining threads and riddled with beautiful mistakes. Our
worlds story is not seen in one light, there is no single way to interpret its trials and tribulations,
victories and defeats. Individuals must supplement physical records with their own version of the
story, utilizing their unique perspective. Only then may the tale of the world be told in all its
glory, only then may it be truly seen, though it is never complete. Ever growing, changing, even
our work here leaves a mark, however, it is not about uncovering the clearest path. It is about
finding the answers and willingness to allow them to lead us unto more, as of yet, blocked paths,
more seemingly unanswerable questions. Each of us must find it within, to speak of the
unknown, to accept it as a challenge to our audacity. Only in this, may we see what has been laid
before us through the paths of the past.
Humanitys story is not a puzzle with defined boundaries, beginnings and ends. Rather it
is a tale which builds upon itself, the pieces overlapping, obscuring, missing. This is a tale we
each know within our heart of hearts, a song whose lyrics have been momentarily forgotten. We
need the answers we glean from these pieces to sing those lyrics back to us, to remind us of who
we really are, what our shared past entailed. Uncovering a things true nature is never an easy
task. It is subjective, confusing, complex. And yet humans have been doing it for millennia.
Discovering something unknown, understanding something tangled, loving something imperfect.
These are the fantastic truths which give light and warmth where the landscape had once been
shrouded in shadow. This is what Herodotus sought to do through the dissemination of the bits
 Nagle 2

and pieces of our blended histories. That which he yearned to discover within the seemingly
unanswerable questions, whether they remained so for lack of experience or resources we cannot
tell, though certainly not from lack of trying. His attempts to distinguish and disperse such
multifaceted knowledge concerning so many spheres of influence and seemingly separate
regions of familiarity allows us to better see that the cultures we often identify as separate
identities may not have been as isolated as initially believed.
Humans are resilient creatures. We constantly strive towards adapting ourselves to best
suit our circumstances, be it born of need or desire. It is this ability to adapt and interconnect the
segments of our surroundings and the way in which we interact with them which has continued
to keep us thriving and at times continuing in our oft stubborn ways. We are both rigid and
flexible at the same time, adapting each as it suits our particular needs, or the needs of the
organization for which we are acting. As a result, it can be determined that Herodotuss work in
many ways resembles the great willow tree of our past in that it is firm in the information it gives
about the origins of the Persian Wars and yet finds strength in what it leaves out, allowing it to
bend and endure the ravages of time with a supple and graceful beauty. Herodotus and his use of
prose offers a different view of ancient history, through the process of recording and reporting
the various aspects which he determined contributory. As a result, he often had, or chose, to
select certain aspects of his narrative which he believed contributed to his tale regarding the
origins and events of the Persian Wars and their surrounding issues, such as the
interconnectedness of the East and the West, in a reasonable and amicable way.
One of the greatest accomplishments which may be attributed to Herodotus is the
dissemination of concepts and ideas that others of his time might not have given much
precedence to and subtly, yet thoroughly, illuminated their duality of natures. However, through
the citation of his primary purpose, which was to explain the reasons as to why the Greeks and
Persians fought the Persian Wars, he was also able to pick and choose what aspects and elements
he deemed important to place in his Histories. In doing so, he acts as a source through which we
may be able to discern some of the more subtle tendencies and leanings of Herodotus himself,
and to an extant, those belonging to his time. By declaring his ultimate goal as displaying his
inquiry so that human achievements may not become forgotten in time, and great and marvelous
 Nagle 3

deeds - some displayed by Greeks, some by barbarians - may not be without their glory; and
especially to show why the two peoples fought with each other., Herodotus himself indicates
that each narrative and seemingly random aside, in his opinion, somehow contributes positively
to describing the purpose and events of the Persian Wars (Herodotus 1.1). Thus, we have cause to
believe that each individual piece was carefully handpicked by Herodotus so as to not only give
as accurate a portrayal of the events and motivations behind the actions of individuals, not to
mention entire countries and ethnic groups, but to also demonstrate the extent of his knowledge
of the subject matter, and to paint, using as wide a brush as possibly, within his readers mind the
cultural, ethical, and economical knowledge and belief differential between the major players of
the Wars. Herein, Herodotuss primary role is that of storytelling personified; his recorded
research and knowledge base is from whence the tale grows, without each other the one would
not occur. He is the first to conduct such an extensive research project and record his findings in
such a way that his contemporaries would be likely to look upon it with favor. Harking back to
the abilities of Homer, he spins precious threads of history into a wonderfully vibrant tapestry.
Still he has prejudices and limitations ascertained through, and born of, the human character and
condition.
Herodotus, in his humanistic view, attempts to emphasize the inherent rationality which
he believes to be characteristic to humanity through his inclusion of the alternate story of Helen
of Sparta. Herodotus maintains that Helen was left in Egypt by Paris according to the Egyptian
Pharaoh Proteuss wishes, after having been blown off course on their route back to Troy. He
claims to have heard this version from the priests at the temple of Aphrodite the Foreigner with
his support being that had the treasure or Helen, both of which Paris stole from Menelaus, have
been in Troy they would have been handed over immediately for he could not believe that either
Priam or any other kinsman of his was mad enough to be willing to risk his own and his
childrens lives and safety of the city, simply to let Paris continue to live with Helen. (Herodotus
2.119). This is assuming that pride and stubbornness does not contribute to the Trojans decision
and that humans are rational creatures, which is difficult to assume under any circumstance.
However, this alternate story serves to bring the humanity of the Trojans into the forefront of the
conflict, reminding the readers that they are not the uncaring, selfish, and warmongering people
 Nagle 4

whom Homer and other authors seem to depict them as. Helens story also serves to highlight the
possible reactions which others might have had concerning such events had they had an
opportunity to intervene, as did Proteus. However, Helen was not the only character within the
Greek mythos which Herodotus attempted to re-humanize and whos story he used to remind
those engaging with his works of the connections they themselves had with the East.
Herodotus presents the possibility that Heracles may have been of Egyptian origin rather
than a native Theban hero as a result of the Egyptian origins of his parents Amphityron and
Alcmene, as well as being one of the twelve gods produced from the eight (Herodotus 2.44).
He claims to have also made a voyage to Tyre in Phoenicia because he had heard of a temple in
Tyre which had been dedicated to Heracles. Here he claims to have found a temple as ancient as
Tyre itself, and that Tyre had already stood for two thousand three hundred years as well as
another in Thasos built by the Phoenicians who settled in Thasos after having searched for
Europa which he determined to have been founded five generations before Heracles made his
first appearance in Greece. Though Herodotus included both Egyptian and Phoenician origins of
Heracles, a hero so thoroughly rooted into and important to the mythology of the Thebans that it
is challenging to envision a Heracles different from the one we are so commonly acquainted
with, he also felt the need to support his belief in Greek dominance in his worship by explaining,
I think that the wisest course is taken by those Greeks who maintain a double cult of this deity,
with two temples, in one of which they worship him as an Olympian and divine, and in the other
pay him such honor as is due to a hero. (Herodotus 2.45). In this way he is able to portray the
alternate beginnings of Heracles, while still catering to the beliefs of his main audience.
Perseus the son of Danae, the daughter of the King of Argos, the demigod who killed the
gorgon, saved Andromeda, and founded Mycenae, is yet another hero whos origins Herodotus
traces to the East, specifically Egypt. This connection is made clear when he mentions, When I
asked why it was that Perseus revealed himself only to the people of Chemmis, and why they
alone of the Egyptians celebrated games in his honor, the answer was that Perseus belonged by
birth to their city; Danaus and Lynceus, they said were Chemmites before they sailed to Greece,
and from them they trace Perseus descent. (Herodotus 2.91). Though the worship of Perseus as
a hero began in Greece, and Herodotus makes special note of this single case when the
 Nagle 5

Chemmites adopted this custom from the Greeks instead of the other way around, he is willing
to, and in fact does, detail the non-Greek origins of one of the great heroes, sharing the
responsibility for him and the great actions which he accomplished.
Dionysus, hailing from Thebes within the Greek mythos, the god of revelry and wine,
knowing oneself and breaking conformities in order to better fit into society, is also recognized
as having more Eastern origins than the Greek emphasis upon his Theban mother, especially
within tragedy, would indicate. Herodotus, however, maintains that Melampus, son of Amythaon,
introduced Dionysus and his worship through the use of sacrifice and phallic processions into
Greece through a combination of his knowledge of Egyptian and Near Eastern religion.
Herodotus further explains that, Melampus got his knowledge of the worship of Dionysus
through Cadmus of Tyre and the people who came with him from Phoenicia to the country now
called Boeotia. (Herodotus 2.50). Therefore, it may be determined that Cadmus brought
knowledge of Dionysus to this region when he founded the city of Thebes while looking for his
sister Europa, the Phoenician princes who had been carried off by the god Zeus. This can be
further analyzed to identify Cadmuss use of the worship and knowledge of Dionysus brought
with him to Boeotia so as to increase the legitimacy of his, and his peoples, claim to the land
and the beginnings of creating a legacy for themselves within the larger sphere of the Grecian
mythos through creating parallels between the new gods appearance in the region with their
own. Despite this admission, Herodotus continues his pattern of reaffirming Greek supremacy in
the worship of the gods and their traditions associated with them by stating that the doctrine of
Dionysuss worships, more perfect development was the work of later teachers. (Herodotus
2.49). Through Herodotuss inclusions of alternative origins of these individuals, who are often
viewed as wholly Greek creations, we are able to better see how expansion of influences may
have been integrated into the cultures with which they came into contact and the effects this
phenomenon has on the way which we view these cultures to this day.
Although it may not fit into our modern perceived notions of how history should be
presented, an author can choose to include or leave out certain events, or place a spin upon the
events recorded, so as to better serve the particular purposes for which they are writing. This is
especially true for the ancient writers, as it was difficult, if not impossible, for them to be held
 Nagle 6

accountable for the accuracy of their writings, and the words of those who actively identified
themselves as the recorders of truth must be taken with a grain of salt attempting to avoid blindly
trusting them without first working to verify their supposed truths with other sources and
indicators within the archaeological record. In order to better understand the reasons for
Herodotus writing, and why he decided to include certain stories, anecdotes, and inferences to
certain aspects of culture instead of, or in addition to, others, we must attempt to place ourselves
into the time in which he was writing, the knowledge from which he was drawing, and
acknowledge the life events which would have influenced such decisions, as well as identifying
the purpose for which his works were meant.
It is possible that he chose to include such origin stories, especially when he seems to
actively avoid including blatantly religious aspects of deities throughout The Histories, on
account of his attempts to include pieces of the cultural narrative, both of Greece as well as those
originating abroad, while trying to explain how this narrative affects the causal relationships
between them. Unlike the Epic poetry of yore, Herodotus acknowledges the various ways of
going about something and attempts to identify the motivations behind actions and events that
one would not expect if they were not aware of the basis upon which the cultures with which
they interacted were built. In this way he is perhaps subtly telling the Greeks to look more
towards observing and considering that which lies outside of their boarders, including the Ionian
city-states, in a way not directly related to warfare and knowledge thought to have been needed
in settling or facilitating disputes between the regions. Herodotus might also be utilizing the
strategy of reverse psychology in that he convinces people to listen to the stories he conveys by
making them seem a bit more grounded in things with which they are already familiar, thus
making it more personal to them; such as can be seen within his alternate explanation of Helens
whereabouts during the Trojan War. Through placing each facet of the known story, and, in some
cases, validated by him, clearly in front of those reading his works, he essentially allows them to
decide what they believe. In noting this, we can reasonably determine that Herodotus was
perhaps leaving room for error by mentioning various sides of the same story which he had
heard, and only occasionally adding his own input on a subject in a more anecdotal fashion. This
would successfully enable the work to be considered a substantial, and relatively accurate, source
 Nagle 7

of past knowledge written for posterity, and therefore valuable and worthwhile, even if new
information arrises that proves part of his beliefs, knowledge base, or hypotheses wrong.
Through his chosen process, Herodotus penned his works to be studied into perpetuity.
His decisions to include these descriptions not only speaks of him as an individual and an
author, but they also serve to make silent mentions of his culture and how he views the culture of
those for which he is writing. It is clear that Herodotus writes in a way which emphasizes his
perspective as an outsider. Even though he hails from the Ionian city-state of Halicarnassus, he is
slightly removed from mainland Greek culture, and therefore is able to convey a distinct sense of
this in the wording he uses. This removal is useful in that it provides the opinions and thoughts
of someone who is well aware of the cultural norms and thereby able to report and comment on
them, however he is also able to notice aspects of the culture which those even more intimately
involved with it and who grew up within it would not notice. Even more, due to his Ionian
origin, it is likely that he would be willing to admit and better able to identify the presence of
aspects in Greek culture which appear to have been imported from elsewhere and modified to fit
the preexisting boundaries of their society than someone who may possess a more extreme
nationalistic view of the Greek way of life. This is made apparent when he says, The Greeks tell
many stories with no thought. and cites their story of how Heracles was taken by the Egyptians
to be sacrificed to Zeus, making it clear they are unaware of Egyptian culture as they do not
know their religion prevents them from offering animals as sacrifice except for sheep and bulls
which have passed a necessary test for cleanliness (Herodotus 2.45). He is able to remove
himself while reporting events and beliefs corresponding with the Persian Wars and their
immediate and outlying aspects. Inclusion of the Eastern origins of such quintessential Greek
heroes and gods could indicate the Greeks need to legitimize their own origins and capabilities
through their ancient connections with these people, perhaps even legitimizing their victories in
the Persian wars or the antiquity and importance of their own cultural narrative, while
demonstrating their knowledge about these ancient events and people. While Herodotus may be
more removed from mainland Greek culture and tradition, he remains of Greek origin. Therefore,
he may have nationalistic tendencies and wish to display knowledge of well renowned Greeks,
like Solon, having gone and aided faraway kings, and that Greek natives have traveled and
 Nagle 8

gathered their ability and awareness of the world around them through their own devices, which
they have then incorporated seamlessly into their own perceptions. Moreover, the original origins
of these gods and heroes give strong evidence of ancient Greek culture following the patterns of
a more synthetic and older culture, appropriating that which they deem important or interesting
and using it for their own personal needs or gains, as they do in regards to their tall tales about
Egyptian tradition.
Herodotus used his mentions of the heroes and gods within The Histories not only to
facilitate the forward movement of his narratives, but possibly also as subtle attempts to break
the typical belief that the landscape of geography has a static effect upon the people who engage
with it, and that, due to this, the characteristics of the peoples of each region correspond to the
regions in which they live. By including the previous more eastern oriented origins of these
Greek characters he is able to demonstrate how people are able to evolve with their surroundings,
both physical and social, taking aspects of things already familiar to them and adapting them to
best fit into their preexisting belief system, which is also adapted to make room for the new
additions. Herodotus manages to separate myth and what he considers to be true history while
also providing sufficient cultural background concerning the regions on which he places his
focus and illuminating different issues and notions within both.
The concept of treating myth as separate from fact based history is an interesting
divergent characteristic of Herodotus and his works, and his deviation from treating the old tales
as hard historical fact sets him apart from other so called recorders of history who came before
him. Herodotus tries to be as rational as possible and explains much of which may be seen as
slightly irrational to some. As he is unable to rationalize each event within mythology to all
people, he may have decided to avoid its inclusion as much as possible except for basic cultural
explanation. It could also be a product of those of his time not needing much explanation in
regard to what we consider to be their mythology and its underlying implications, such as
where they were supposed to be, what they were, what they meant, and what they did. Perhaps
his focus upon fate and nature, and what could be seen as natural causes, which he chooses to
focus on, is giving the concept of mythology and belief another spin that those of his time would
not have expected or understood beforehand, and through doing so he is trying to get them to
 Nagle 9

think in a different light altogether. Thus, should his work include what they already knew, it
would be more difficult for them to latch onto and hold that which is different and more unusual
as they would have their safety blanket ever present. Maybe his reasoning is as simple as not
wanting to get caught up in the hierarchical explanations of the gods, their works, and the minute
details of their facets, and so keeping his histories to a slightly lighter degree gives them a
maneuverability which then focuses more so on the natural forces which would have been more
difficult to explain away, though which he still attempts to rationalize through his continuous
anecdotes of those who could not count themselves happy until they were dead, among other
mentions. Or to include all of this information would have been too long or confusing as he
would have needed to include all of the different ways in which these individuals were viewed
and worshiped throughout Greece in order to maintain the patterns of perspective he had already
set. He appears to try to remain impartial and report what he determined could be verified in
some way, whether that be on his own or through his sources. If this is his goal, as it appears to
be, reporting what he considers to be mythos as clear, unequivocable truth, as had been the
previous fashion, would have thwarted his attempts as firsthand knowledge for such topics would
not be available.
In contrast, however, he does include mythos in some ways and cannot get rid of them
completely. If talking about a culture, because they are so far intwined, religious backgrounds
and cultural tendencies cannot be entirely discounted. His own belief is supported when he
states, And now I hope that both gods and heroes forgive me for saying what I have said on
these matters! (Herodotus 2.45). History is and can be considered the divine, we uphold the
nostalgic age which has passed and consider its hardships to be better than the ones we have now
and as a result we enshrine that which has passed in the frame of the future. It would be hard to
see previous cultures being any different in this regard.
Throughout The Histories it is the evolution of the characters we observe, but also that of
the author, as well as that of the culture in which the author is writing and placing the meaning
of, and behind, his works. Some might view such works as futile attempts at collecting data to
speak of the times in history which may have been partially lost to us, and, in a way, the
necessity of attempting to answer these questions and expand our knowledge of past events, this
 Nagle 10

is true. But this? This is something else in its entirety. It is using the information we uncover and
through it trying to discern how the ancients thought, how they tackled the problems they
encountered, whether daily or highly unusual. This knowledge, and this alone will help us to
recreate humanitys past, not merely for those who find great amusement in bygone relics
exhumed, but for each person to use in their personal search for meaning, so that they may place
their personal twist upon the past, in the hopes that they may apply what they learn to their
present, and see the future through the lens of the past. Through Herodotuss methods of
chronicling history, we have a contrasting methodological perspective to better focus that lens,
and through it, possibly our future.