tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post4556267867485919713..comments2023-11-10T05:02:16.976+00:00Comments on It's All Just Ancient History: Crazy Tales from HerodotusCaitlinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01016190763140072937noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-50396673453321166312016-07-12T21:17:48.419+01:002016-07-12T21:17:48.419+01:00Herodotus was a great man. Many of the 'ridicu...Herodotus was a great man. Many of the 'ridiculous' stories and descriptions he himself regards as dubious, and merely records them because that's what the people of this or that region believed. There's a difference to what he records and what he believed. Further, the comical anecdotes lighten up his history, adding color and making it all interesting and enjoyable, which is more than can be said of our robotic, plain fact, no-nonsense academic style today. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-90050359658899789192016-03-12T12:39:26.739+00:002016-03-12T12:39:26.739+00:00You missed out the giant furry gold-digging ants!!...You missed out the giant furry gold-digging ants!!!BootyEnthusiasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18147554117775058855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-35637815790970050282013-10-27T19:10:18.852+00:002013-10-27T19:10:18.852+00:00I'm sorry you think this is a poor introductio...I'm sorry you think this is a poor introduction to Herodotus. It's not intended as an introduction at all. If it was, I'd have done a much clearer lay out of what his methods were (as he tells us) and what material he covers.<br /><br />Since I called these "stories" and "tales" and I've also said he was extremely rigorous by the standards of his day, I don't think I've made him come across as a liar. Caitlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01016190763140072937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-21661537085360227252013-10-27T00:54:30.981+01:002013-10-27T00:54:30.981+01:00A better example of Herodotus's sillyness that...A better example of Herodotus's sillyness that you left out is his telling of what is inscribed on the pyramids. According to Herodotus they recount how much onions and garlic the workers ate. Which is, of course, ridiculous. But he likely asked his Egyptian guide and the average Egyptian had long ago lost the ability to read hieroglyphics.<br /><br />Tourists being scammed buy guides since 400ish BC. McWhaddenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04513458992942505812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-17464978862758450822013-10-27T00:50:58.453+01:002013-10-27T00:50:58.453+01:00I get what you are saying/doing but you are pretty...I get what you are saying/doing but you are pretty unfair to Herodotus. If someone first read this as their intro to him he would come off as a liar. When the reason he is so funny is for the most part he is not (and therefore honestly put down everything he was told no matter how silly). Hippo aside he was actually usually pretty good at saying things like "I am told that" or "the Persians believe that" "the Scythians believe". This is the case with the Lydia story, which he recounts as was told to him and explicitly states he was doing such. He was recounting events before his time in cultures that for the most part only used oral history. He had no sources, no way to fact check. All he could do was report what was told to him. He often gave three versions of the same story. For instance, he gives three Scythian origin stories. The one he says he believes is true is that it was a mixing of some nomad tribes (probably true) but the other two he doesn't believe are mythical and fantastic. He gives several reasons for the flooding of the Nile. One, he doesn't believe, is that snow melting in the south floods the river. This is correct and he believes it is false because he doesn't know about the equator (how could he). He believes it just gets hotter and hotter the further you go so there would be no snow. Even though he doesn't *believe it* he reports it. So his readers can make up their mind.<br /><br />Another famous example is the Phoenicians who told him that they circumvented Africa and on the other side the sun was to their left. Which he doesn't believe because as far as he knows it isn't possible. But he reports it and tells the readers he is skeptical but they can make up their own minds. Of course, that is where the sun would be had the Phoenicians done what they claimed.<br /><br />And in the same passage as the hippo he accurately describes a crocodile showing he had been there. He does have some slips like that where he doesn't make it clear that he is just recounting what was told to him. But he is usually very good about doing just that. He never hid what he was doing. He traveled around and spoke to people and wrote down what they said to him. Often commenting on what he believed and what he didn't but he included it all. He is more like a Studs Turkel than a true historian. But his work is actually more honest this way. Men like Thucydides would recount things they had no way of knowing but did not say how they were told, who told them, and whether it was verbatim. He just made it all seemed like fact. As opposed to Herodotus who set forth that you can't believe everything you hear but this is what I was told. McWhaddenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04513458992942505812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-16116061375291429262013-10-27T00:47:22.100+01:002013-10-27T00:47:22.100+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.McWhaddenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04513458992942505812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-40886208468135973432012-07-14T15:49:25.125+01:002012-07-14T15:49:25.125+01:00I've read all or very nearly all of Herodotus,...I've read all or very nearly all of Herodotus, and you're right; there's an awful lot of good material in there.<br /><br />Perhaps I should have said his work "looks quite ridiculous *in parts*", as I hope you'll agree it does. I wasn't trying to rubbish his entire corpus, though. I have great affection for Herodotus, and rate him a lot higher than Thucydides, for example (but that's a whole other can of worms). <br /><br />However, the point of this blog is to be funny, and interesting for the "lay" historian, as well as factual, and I thought people might prefer to read about some of the more outlandish parts of Herodotus, rather than a dry discussion of his merits. There are other people a lot more qualified than me to write those, and if you're interested, the appendices of the Landmark Herodotus are very, very good. <br /><br />As for Aristotle, I could almost certainly write a similar blog for him, or Newton or any other factual author from 50+ years ago. In light of our greater knowledge, their mistakes appear somewhat comical. But I didn't, because I'm vastly more familiar with Herodotus than the others.Caitlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01016190763140072937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-8011827642747143882012-07-10T03:54:53.121+01:002012-07-10T03:54:53.121+01:00There is a reason why it is fashionable to ridicul...There is a reason why it is fashionable to ridicule Herodotus. Have you actually read his anthropological sections on Egypt, Libya and the Scythians? So he got a few things wrong, so did Newton and just about every other scientist, historian, anthropologist and writer who ever tried to construct a record of anything. Why is he singled out as the father of lies? Aristotle thought worms could spontaneously self generate. He is not ridiculed because of it, he is hailed as the first great biologist.<br /><br />"So with animals, some spring from parent animals according to their kind, whilst others grow spontaneously and not from kindred stock; and of these instances of spontaneous generation some come from putrefying earth or vegetable matter, as is the case with a number of insects, while others are spontaneously generated in the inside of animals out of the secretions of their several organs.[5]"<br />—Aristotle, History of Animals, Book V, Part 1<br /><br />Concerning sexual reproduction, Aristotle argued that the male parent provided the "form," or soul, that guided development through semen, and the female parent contributed unorganized matter, allowing the embryo to grow.[7]<br /><br />The second quote is, no doubt, one of the reasons Aristotle has remained so popular.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-52124508389410717462012-03-29T08:55:02.463+01:002012-03-29T08:55:02.463+01:00Of course! Quick, you must inform the academic com...Of course! Quick, you must inform the academic community that we may spend then next twenty years arguing about what was fashionable when Herodotus went to Egypt. Get writing on that paper!Caitlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01016190763140072937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7735998481109222581.post-8159175679731655372012-03-27T14:50:56.135+01:002012-03-27T14:50:56.135+01:00It's well known that the Ancient Egyptians mad...It's well known that the Ancient Egyptians made their hippopotimuses wear wigs in the interest of public decency. If this is taken into account then Herodotus' account of hippos is entirely consistent.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346317373544922048noreply@blogger.com