Among his many works, Plutarch wrote an essay "On the Malignity (Malice) of Herodotus," a work in which he criticizes the father of history as a slanderer and a blasphemer, a man who dwells on the negative and omits the noble and the good. He admits that Herodotus is a great artist, but (he says) that only makes things worse.Please read as much as you can of Books 8 and 9 of Herodotus' history. Be sure to read Book 9, Sections 90-122 (pp. 590-603 in the new Penguin edition). Cite one story from this section *and* one story *from some other part* of Herodotus' Histories that either supports Plutarch's criticisms or shows that Herodotus includes more than just negatives.
"They expressed their disapproval with great vigor, and the Peloponnesians gave way." (IX.109)
ReplyDeleteHerodotus includes a defense of the Ionian's right to self-determination. The Peloponnesians desired to evacuate all loyal Greeks from Ionia and to abandon it to the Persians. They determined that it wouldn't be possible to maintain the constant vigilance required to prevent Persian vengeance for Ionian revolt. However, the Athenians strongly disapproved of Spartan meddlers in their own affairs and felt the same rights must be protected for other Greeks as well. They stood up for the rights of Ionians to determine for themselves if they stayed in Ionia or withdrew due to the lingering Persian threat. Herodotus didn't dwell solely on the negative outcomes of the war but included the liberations that occurred along the way and the protection of the rights of those newly liberated Greeks.
"Continue, then, to possess what you have acquired; and have the wisdom to remain always the man you have proved yourself today." (VII.29)
Herodotus also includes an example of the rewards of loyalty. Pythius was certainly no fool and amassed quite a fortune, 7000 darics short of 4 million gold darics. Whether he was shrewd to ally himself to the man with the biggest army ever or he was truly an admirer of Xerxes, he offered hospitality to Xerxes' army and willingly offered his whole fortune to help pay the expenses of the war against the Greeks. Xerxes was impressed. Not only did he instruct Pythius to keep his fortune due to Pythius' demonstrated loyalty, but he also gave Pythius the final 7,000 darics necessary to make Pythius' fortune a round 4 million darics. His final instruction to Pythius was to stay wise because he would never regret it, now or later. Herodotus didn't focus solely on the negative qualities of Xerxes and his conquests but also included this story of the good treatment Xerxes gave to those subjects that proved to be loyal.
In book 9, the Athenians know the Persians are closing in. They have been waiting for assistance from Sparta and it hasn't come. They know they need to act--FAST. A "councillor" suggests they propose Murychides' messages to a general assembly of the people. He may or may not have been bribed by Mardonius to make this silly suggestion.
ReplyDelete"In any case the Athenians, both those in the council and those outside, were so enraged when they heard it that they surrounded Lycidas and stoned him to death...With all the uproar in Salamis over Lycidas, the Athenian women soon found out what had happened; whereupon, without a word from the men, they got together...flocked to Lycidas' house and stoned his wife and children"
This defends Plutarch's argument. Herodotus describes negative events, even Greek/Athenian events. On the other hand, Herodotus defends these actions on the next page, by describing the lack of Spartan assistance.
The story of Xerxes' attraction to his brother, Masistes' wife was also very negative. Xerxes falls in love with his brother's wife and yearns for her. After various attempts at getting her into bed, he decides to marry his son too his brother's daughter (ewww). Xerxes then fell for her and his attempts were successful. Xerxes' wife, Amestris, had an idea of what was going on and eventually punished Masistes' wife for Xerxes' infidelity: "Amestris sent for the soldiers of the royal bodyguard and had Masistes' wife horribly mutilated."
Gruesome details follow. This is clearly a negative event during the Persian war. But once again, Herodotus had a purpose in telling it (and really what are the odds of this being true...how could anyone have found out what happened with Xerxes' family for certian?). Xerxes' brother was very upset (duh) and proceeded to start an uprising. Unfortunately Xerxes figured that out and had Masistes killed before he reached his destination. Had the uprising occurred, the war certainly would have panned out differently.
It seems that Herodotus does seem to include a lot of negative stories and events, but they are justified. He takes quite a roundabout way to explain the background or a chance event that could have turned out differently. One has to give him a hand, he did not have previous works to cite or suggest for background info. He had to supply it all himself. While it takes a little while for one to really dive into what he is saying, he paints quite a portrait with what must have been a small amount of concrete information
"The Greeks who sailed for the Hellespont from Mycale, after being delayed for a time by foul winds at Lectum, reached Abydos and found, contrary to expectation, that the bridge had already been broken up-to destroy them had, indeed, been the chief purpose of their coming."
ReplyDeleteThis contrasts Plutarch because something positive happened. How about that for the greeks. They went in sail to do a mission and it was already completed. I believe the pessimist would say we wasted our time, but I think Herodotus was saying good for them, one less thing for us to do! Now they could use their extra time to accomplish something else, like seige Sestos.
From book eight
"Meanwhile Themistocles, always greedy for money, sent demands to the other islands; he employed the same messengers as he had sent to Xerxes, and backed his demand by the threat that, if they did not pay what he asked, he would bring the Breek fleet and blockade them into surrender."
I don't see this as negative or positive. I believe Herodotus was just trying to be a good historian and writer and just relay the events that happened as best as he could.
R. Casey Oberle
In Book 8, Herototus is describing some of the defenses for the city of Athens. "The Athenians say that the Acropolis is guarded by a great snake, which lives in the temple; indeed they believed so lierally in its existence that they put out monthly offerings for it to eat in the form of honey-cake. Now in the past the honey-cake used always be consumed, but on this occasion it was untouched." Herodotus goes on to explain how the people saw this as a bad sign. This snake was connected to a temple which was connected to a god. If the snake left that ment the god left too. If the gods had left Athens was in trouble.
ReplyDeleteIn Book 9 I picked the story of Euenius. Euenius was supposed to watch a group of sheep because they were special according to the oracle. While watching the sheep Euenius fell asleep and sixty of the sheep died. As punishment for falling asleep Euenius lost his eye sight. The gods felt this was to strong a punishment and ordered Euenius to be rewarded.
I would agree with Plutarch in that much of Herodotus is negative, but I would add that this is a story about war. Most parts of war are not that nice so I can see why they are negative. Herodotus usually explains his stories to some extent, and not all of them are completly negative. Euenius' story starts off negative, but in the end he receives plenty of rewards to make up for his loss.
Book 9 section 111:
ReplyDeleteXerxes reply to Masistes rejection of his offer, "I no longer offer you the chance of marrying my daughter-nor will you live another day with that wife of yours. Thus may you learn to accept a proffered gift."
This story paints a pretty negative image of how Xerxes was. The fact that he would have someone that was so close to him killed because he declined an offer. There are other things going on to during this time, many people are being murdered for almost no reason and people are lying and cheating to get what they want. To me this paints a very diturbing image of the times.
Book 8 section 51:
Thebans had told them that Thespia and Plataea had refused to submit to Persian domination: hence thier destruction.
This on of many examples that make the Persians look like terrible people. The people who don't submit to Persia's will shall be destroyed and those who do submit will basically be enslaved. Like Book 9 it just doesn't say much about any of the good things Persia might have been doing, just the bad things.
in book seven it shows a lack of compassion when he states " i urge you therefore to abandon this plan to take my advice and do not run any such terrible risk when there is no necessity to do so"
ReplyDeletein book nine it shows compassion when a slave girl breaks out of persian slavory and runs to the greek lines in order to be saved."o King of sparta save me i beg you from slavery which awaits the prisoner of war for one service i am already i your debt." the king says back to her need not be afraid as a suppliant you are safe and still more so if you are indeed the daughter of Hegetorides of Cos.
In Book 8, Sec. 61-3, Herodotus paints a very unattractive picture of the Greek Allies. Most were from the Peloponnesian Peninsula, and had already allowed the Persians to take most of Greece north of the isthmus, including Attica. They wanted only to protect the peninsula, without making any effort to protect the Athenians who had been forced to move to Salamis, or push the Persians back out of the northern portions of Greece. In a debate, Themistocles argues that it is necessary to defend their position on Salamis in order to defend the Peloponnese. A Corinthian leader basically tells him to sit down an shut up because he no longer has a state, disregarding the fact that the Athenians don't have their state because the Allies wouldn't help defend it. Themistocles eventually sways the leader, Eurybiades of Sparta, but Herodotus says that in his opinion, this was only because the Athenians threatened to withdraw their (much needed) support, and sail off to Italy.
ReplyDeleteWhile not exactly slanderous (the debates, at least, could be confirmed facts), this is one instance in which Herodotus shows a definite pro-Athenian bias. Here, the Athenians are arguing to fight to secure the freedom, not only for their own state in Attica, but the rest of Greece not on the Peloponnesian Peninsula. He downplays the role of Eurybiades as a hero of the war, and instead focuses on the role Themistocles plays.
In Book 9, Sec. 90-1, Herodotus shows the Greek Allies in a more noble light, as Leotychidas (another Spartan) agrees to help the Ionians gain their freedom. Herodotus does, however, indicate that this was more in compliance with a prophecy than because of any real sentiment of Greek Patriotism. This is clear in Sec. 106, when the Peloponnesian leaders suggest that the Ionians be removed from their Asian lands, so that they won't have to be at the trouble of rescuing them in the future. Again, it is left to the Athenians to argue for the Ionians to retain (some) of their autonomy by remaining in their own lands.
The story is Scyllias, though short, is a rather possative look at greek life. Scyllias deserts the persians for the Greeks. THis would seem to be a more positive look at Greek Culture, what person would desert his own country for something that would be worse. This story also shows Herodotus's ability to pull some fact from fiction. He gives us that mythology behind Scyllias's journey to the Greeks, but also gives us a much believable account of how he made it to Artemisium.
ReplyDeleteIn book 9 we see a different approach by Herodotus, one that may better fit Plutarch's criticism. We see the story of Euenius. This man was in charge of a flock of sheep sacred to the town, when a wold got in with the sheep they put out his eyes, later realizing what they had done in their haste, the town tried to reimburse him for their wrong doing. Here we see Herodotus focussing on the wrong doings of the town on this one man. To many early people this may seem like slander, it shows a hidden fault in the countries morality, however Herodotus new that their were both good and bad parts to history and it seems that he wanted to tell both stories. Herodotus seems to have given us a much more valuable part of greek history than many wanted him to by telling us both the good and bad of his country.
John Kath
ReplyDeleteIn some ways Plutarch is correct, but he boils Herodotus down to very simple terms. Even history books of today are filled with wars and other terrible events because that is where change and profound things happen. Herodotus wrote about the war between the Greeks and the large Persian empire. This was a huge event for both sides, and as a good historian, he tried to give as much detail as he could. It is not however a body count. As stated in the first paragraph in his book, he wanted great deeds on both sides not to be forgotten. There is a story where Hegesistratus appealed to the Greeks to go and save the Ionians that were under Persian captivity. So yes, it is a story of a battle. But the theme of the story is that the Greeks from all over the Mediterranean came together to fight and help each other against the Persian empire. It is a case of many negatives coming together to give a brighter picture
Book 9: 109- "They expressed their disapproval with great vigor, and the Peloponnesians gave way."
ReplyDeleteIn the way I took this cite he showed how the more negative was told their feeling of the peloponnesians in meaning not to be as them in no way.
In chapter 9, sections 108-113 tells the tragic story of Xerxes falling in love with his brother, Masisttes’ wife. Being a faithful wife, Masisttes’ wife did not submit to any approaches Xerxes made to her and knowing because he respected his brother these passes would not become forceful. Xerxes then comprised a plan as an attempt to increase his chances with this woman: he marries his own son, Darius to Masisttes’ daughter. Forgetting her mother, Xerxes then approaches Masisttes’ daughter and his new daughter-in-law. Promising her anything she wishes, she demands the very robe he’s wearing, which was a gift from Xerxes wife, Amestris. Amestris was livid with this news and at the Royal Supper sought her revenge. Knowing it was Xerxes original feelings for Masisttes’ wife that brought forward this situation, Amestris request’s Masisttes’ wife as her own. Amestris has the woman mutilated: “her breasts, nose, ears, and lips were cut off and thrown to the dogs; then her tongue was torn out and … she was sent home.” Engaged by this sight, Masisttes and his men start traveling to confront Xerxes; Xerxes knowing this, sends armed forces to kill his own brother. This is story is defiantly memorable for the horrific situation that Xerxes presents to those he loves. It’s interesting in considering the difference in moral standards between then and today.
ReplyDeleteAnother noteworthy part in The Histories, is the beginning sections of Chapter 8 because many examples of a good historian are present here. Section one, for example, provides not only a clear purpose for the following text, but also supports this data with statistics and accurate information. (The purpose being a description of the Greek Navy and stats including the associated numbers). Section 3 includes more information, but in leading to the ‘story aspect’ of the Greek Navy battles Herodotus includes a memorable quote “for the evil of internal strife is worse than united war in the same proportion as war itself is worse than peace.” Herodotus thus proves himself to have another strong quality of a historian, being a good story teller. The text proceeds to discuss how Greece sought assistance in fighting the Persians.
In Book IX when Herodotus speaks of many Greeks now not worried about a pending attack and sitting back and having many festivals, he didn't necessarily mean every single person. Plutark asks how did a thousand and five show up? Who were these strange Chileus? Plutark is being a little too critical here - it is very possible that the majority of Sparta was celebrating a brief period of peace while some wanted to get in on the action.
ReplyDeletePlutark criticizes the part in Book VIII about how Herodotus says that Adimantus fled in fear and rose up the sails full mass quickly to get away double-time. Plutark says Adimantus could have had another reason for leaving and Herodotus is just assuming that this is why. That would have been possible, had not Herotodus been in contact with the Pinnace that momentarily intercepted Adimantus's voyage. If Herodotus knows what the men aboard the Pinnace said to Adimantus, wouldn't Herodotus know what Adimantus said to the mean aboard? Herodotus has mostly accurate accounts and when he does not he lets the readers know that he is not completely certain what the motivations are.
- Jefferson Gunderson
I think that Herodotus shows more than just negatives. In the story of Euenius after losing sixty sheep after falling asleep on the job, his sentence was to lose his eyes. So he did lose his eyes, but then the oracle explained that Euenius had unjustly lost his sight because god sent the wolves to kill the sheep, so then Herodotus tells how the people of Apollonia try to make amends with Euenius by giving him whatever he wants, in this case it is two large estates. In this story, both good and bad sides of the people of Apollonia were shown.
ReplyDeleteMichael Abu-Sirriya