Herodotus was hailed as "The Father of History" by Cicero; To me, he might as well be the Father of Humanism.

I've read a few war epics, Homer's Iliad, Hugo's Les Misérables and Tolstoy's War and Peace, The Histories excels them all in terms of scope, structure, richness of content, intricacy and theatrical grandeur. The main theme / storyline is the Persian Wars, i.e., the conflicts between the Persian Empire and Greek nations, culminating in the invasion of Greece by Xerces I; the underlying theme is the struggle between tyranny and freedom, between the inexorability of fate and the triumph of the human spirit.

Like threads in a beautiful Persian tapestry, Herodotus weaves together numerous elements in his narratives, the histories and geographies of the many nations in Asia and Europe, the customs, cultures and achievements of the peoples, the remarkable characters and lives of individuals, and the oracles foreshadowing their fates, from kings to slaves, heroes and thieves, men, women and children, their words and deeds all distinct and memorable.

Some accused Herodotus of making up fanciful stories rather than recording the facts. I'm reminded of Thomas Mann's comment on War and Peace, "Seldom did art work so much like nature; its immediate, natural power is only another manifestation of nature itself; " If the best art is but a manifestation or imitation of nature, why make up stories when the facts themselves are much more wondrous and glorious?

You live many lives when you read this book. A masterpiece.

I feel kind of wrong reviewing this book as it was written hundreds of years ago, but I’ll give it a whirl

Mă bucură inițiativă Editurii Humanitas „de recuperare a unor mari opere ale Antichității clasice într-o formulă grafică originală și în ediții concepute pentru cititorul de azi.”

Însă, o ediție ca și aceasta poate reprezenta câteva probleme. În primul rand, e foarte importantă subiectivitatea celui care face antologia, ori, în cazul de față, am avut o mare neplăcere să constat că un episod care poate fi ușor introdus printre „cele mai frumoase istorii”, și care de altfel e menționat de majoritatea istoricilor cand vine vorba de Războaiele Medice sau de istoria spartanilor, a fost lasat pe dinafară. Mă refer la povestirea despre fiica regelui Cleomenes si viitoarea soție a regelui Leonidas, Gorgo de doar câțiva ani pe-atunci, care, în momentul când Aristagoras încearcă să-l mituiască pe tatăl sau cu bani pentru a veni in sprijinul Revoltei Ioniei, îi spune: „Tată, dacă nu te ridici și pleci acum, străinul acesta o să te corupă!” (cuvinte aproximative, citate din memorie). In prezenta ediția, se spune „Aristagoras încearcă să-l mituiască pe Cleomenes.” și atât, sărind peste episod. Sigur, într-o antologie nu poate fi loc pentru tot, dar din punctul meu de vedere s-au păstrat unele povestiri care au mai puțină legătură (directă sau indirectă) cu Războaiele Medice, în detrimentul unora ca și aceasta.

O altă abordare care mi se pare neinspirată e felul de a adnota textul. Sunt situații unde pot apărea neclarități sau confuzii din cauza asta, pentru că se găsesc doi termeni pe același rând și persoanele mai puțin cunoscătoare poate ca nu-și vor da seama la care dintre ei se referă nota.

Mai mult, pentru cineva care are pretenția la titlul de „clasicist”, adnotările conțin cateva greșeli impardonabile:
- Confundarea lui Miltiades, tiran in Chersones, cu Miltiades, eroul de la Maraton. Primul e unchiul celui din urmă, nu unul și același om.
- Confundarea lui Polydeukes (Pollux la romani), fratele lui Castor și deci unul din Dioscuri, cu Polinice, fratele lui Eteocles. Cei doi s-au războit pentru tronul Thebei. La început am crezut că e o greșeală de transcriere/tipărire, dar am sesizat greșeala în două parți.
Ar mai fi și o altă greșeală mai mică: se adnotează că hiloții ar fi Messenieni. Intre cele două grupuri e mai degrabă o relație de incluziune, nu de egalitate. Spartanii au cucerit, pe rând, ținuturile din jurul lor (e.g., Laconia). Laconii au ajuns (și ei) hiloți. Că în urma Războaielor Messeniene majoritatea hiloților erau originari din Messenia, e altceva.
Nu am stat sa citesc toate adnotările și glosarul, dar astea mi-au sărit în vedere.

În fine, sper ca în cazul în care Editura Humanitas plănuiește o reeditare a lui Tucicide, să nu mai facă o antologie. Ar fi păcat. Nu sunt foarte de acord cu principiul „cititorul din ziua de azi”. E păcat de anumite opere să fie trunchiate doar pentru a fi făcute cât mai accesibile/atractive pentru cât mai multă lume. Am citit ediția intregrală din anii 60 a Istoriilor. Pe lângă faptul că textul întreg poate fi greoi pe-alocuri - și din punctul acesta de vedere ediția prezentă are un plus, pentru că se citește mai fluent, dar cu ce preț? - erau într-adevăr foarte multe adnotări, până la saturație, dar am învățat multe din notele respective ele, și am înțeles mult mai multe despre ce se povestea decât din ediția asta, în care se regăsesc foarte puține. În fond, adnotările sunt acolo pentru a fi citite sau nu. E la latitudinea cititorului să facă o selecție.

Cât despre textul în sine, rămâne la fel de placut ca întotdeauna, cu toate reproșurile (fondate) care i se aduc.

I absolutely adore this book! It is among my top favorites. What I'm sure most people identify it with, if they can identify it at all, is the movie 300. Yes, this book does relate the first, true story of the 300 Spartans and not with comic pictures. It is one of my favorite stories in this book (there are many: suicidal cats, burning of Athens, Croesus and Solon, etc.), but it is far from the baseness of the horribly inaccurate movie.

Of course, I read selections back in high school. So I presumed that I knew what Herodotus was all about. Then in reading/seeing The English Patient, which quotes very different kinds of selections, I began to suspect I had majorly missed the mark.

On finally reading from cover to cover, I discovered that the story of the invasions of Greece by Darius and Xerxes takes up a very small part of the book, at the end. Yes, that part has some dramatic scenes, some quotable quotes, and is "history." But most of Herodotus is anecdotal anthropology and travelogue and a delightful collection of rumors and traditions. The heart of the book isn't the history, it's the digressions. That's where you get the flavor of the times, a sense of what it might have been like to live in the fifth century B.C.

Eye openers:

The physical territory of Greece was but a small part of the Greek world, long before Alexander conquered and hellenized. Considering how slow and difficult transportation was, it's truly remarkable the cosmopolitan nature of that Mediterranean world. There are Greeks and Greek influence all over Egypt -- and the influence of Egypt on Greece was strong. In fact, it's very difficult to say where one culture ends and another begins -- there is little correlation between political boundaries and cultural boundaries.
The Greeks come across as a semi-nomadic people, frequently taking to their ships en masse, abandoning one territory/city and going off to conquer and settle territory somewhere else in the Mediterranean. They are nomads of the sea. They are like hermit crabs, shedding one shell and then taking over another, or sometimes growing another. There are Greek settlements all along the coasts of Africa, Italy, and Spain, and on almost every island -- not just in the Aegean and Ionian Seas, but also Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica.
The oracles, particularly the oracle at Delphi, play a key role in determining when, where, and how populations move. Anyone contemplating "colonization" consults the oracles and anyone involved in a territorial dispute brought on by colonization consults the oracles as well. Greek peoples seem to be constantly at war with one another and shifting alliances for the flimsiest of reasons -- whether because of a bribe and/or because of some bizarre cultural insult (with obscure precedents in the distant, legendary past). But all trust the same oracle(s) and fear the wrath of gods should they desecrate temples or holy places (regardless of whether it is a god that they themselves hold in high esteem).
Some religious/cultural traditions are very local and others are held in common. The Spartans, for instance, are repeatedly constrained from participating in key battles/events because of local festivals/ceremonies which make little sense to other Greeks. (e.g., don't send troops to battle Darius' army at Marathon, despite the urgent pleas of the Athenians). But all respect the tradition of the Olympics -- even with Xerxes horde advancing on them.
The Persians were not so totally foreign to the Greeks as the Darius/Xerxes passages alone would lead one to believe. There were many Greeks at the Persian court. Many Greek colonies and mainland cities were Persian allies, or simply considered the Persians as another player in their local deadly games of coup and conquest and colonization. It was not just a matter of right and wrong, democracy against the evil empire. The Persians invaded at the prompting and request of various Greeks who wanted their help to advance their own personal ambitions. And even Athens seriously considered switching sides and allying with the Persians.
The Greeks often colonized voluntarily. A dissident faction would, with the full support of the local political powers, gather people, ships, and supplies and go off to conquer or found a city somewhere else. Or facing the threat of conquest, an entire city make take to its ships and sail off over the horizon with only the scantiest notion of its destination, and opportunistically taking root at the first likely looking landfall.
Peoples conquered by the Persians were often forced to colonize. Darius would take soldiers captured in war or the entire populations of conquered cities and resettle them on lands hundreds of miles away. he would give the leaders of his conquered enemies estates and wealth in his own territory, and would resettle some of his own people or subject peoples on the newly conquered land. This approach and the Greek voluntary colonization led to a continuous cultural churning and cross-fertilization. I had thought of the ancient world, with its limitations of transportation, as consisting largely of isolated parochial communities -- like rural mountain towns in the 19th century. Instead it was this vast mixing bowl -- turning and turning and turning again.
There were enormous cultural differences that persisted despite this churning. The traditions and beliefs with regard to marriage/sex and religion/death differ as widely from one city or one small country to the next as they did from island to island in the South Pacific in the 1920s. And on the fringes of the "civilized" world, where there was less churn, and about which far less was known first-hand, the differences much greater and some of the common practices were much more brutal by today's standards. In particular, I was interested to read of a nation where the women as well as the men were warriors, where a woman had to kill a man in battle before she had the right to marry.
When I think of the Mediterranean world in the 5th and 4th century BC, the only woman's name that comes to mind is Aspasia -- the brilliant courtesan, who inspired Plato and others. I was surprised to read in Herodotus about Artemisia -- ruler of a small nation allied with Xerxes. Apparently, the Greeks were somewhat scandalized to see a woman as a warrior/ruler (despite their legends of Amazons). But Artemisia was one of the most effective generals in Xerxes vast army.

Probably the most readable ancient text I've come across. Written between 400-500 B.C, it is a history (maybe the world's first history) of the Greek/Persian war. Herodotus also gave tons of background information on cultures, legends, traditions, gossip, etc of his age from Europe to Africa and the Persian Gulf to Asia. Sometimes he sounds modern in his insight and at other times he's just so gullible. For example, he believes stories of a woman giving birth to a lion and of men with no heads with one eyeball in the middle of their chests. Something else that amused me was how squeamish he was about the Bacchanal/Eleusian mysteries and rites. He had no qualms about describing brutal war and murder and rape or other things that (unlike war) make modern Americans uncomfortable like transvestites, and women leading armies. But, when it came to the mysteries, which were basically ancient people getting drunk and high and losing their inhibitions and dancing and sexing it up while worshipping gods like Dionysius, he felt too sacrilegiously offended to give details. But the climax was of course the wars. We've all seen the movie about the 300 Spartans fighting the massive Persian army, but this book has the source material. Compelling stuff that begins with a war caused by someone abducting a woman and ends with a king killing his brother because he wants his wife.

Hérodote, ça a été pour moi la porte d'entrée dans le monde de l'antiquité...
L'enquête, Livres I à IV
L'Enquête. Livres V à IX

As a history nerd I always had the idea that I would one day read Herodotus. After all he’s generally regarded as the guy who kicked off the whole show. I had put it off due to the length of the book, but Audible were offering it “free” with my membership for a limited period, and it was that which led me to finally conclude “It is time!”

One thing about Audible is that it doesn’t always tell the reader about the translator. I could tell that the version I had was in 19th century English, and from what I can find out, it seems to be the Rawlinson translation.

Apart from a history the book is also a geography and an ethnology. Herodotus, who was a great traveller, describes the world as it was known to him. The Persian Empire is described in detail, as far as “India”, which I think are the lands we now know as Pakistan (of course it was all “India” in Rawlinson’s day). Egypt is also described in detail, and beyond it lies “Ethiopia”, which I think was the country we now call Sudan. The rest of Africa he calls “Libya”, describing how it extends west beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and south to a great sandy desert. Mediterranean Europe is well known but Northern Europe is the subject of garbled rumour. He says he can find out nothing about a northern sea from whence amber is procured (actually true and a reference to the Baltic), nor anything about “the Tin Islands”, (probably a reference to The British Isles). He does know of the Danube, which he calls the Ister, and the Black Sea, which he calls the Euxine. To the north of these are the lands of the Scythians, a “land without marvels”, excepting huge rivers and “the vastness of the plain.”

Herodotus is careful to distinguish hearsay from what he has seen himself. He will frequently make comments along the lines of “In this, I merely repeat what the Libyans say” and at other times will repeat a local legend but add that he personally places no credence in it.

One thing I found interesting, if this translation is accurate, is that on a couple of occasions Herodotus seems to suggest that the ancient Egyptians were black-skinned, “with wooly hair”, adding to my own knowledge of the continuing debate on the appearance of the ancient Egyptians, which will of course never be resolved. Opposing Herodotus is the evidence from hieroglyphs and other sources, suggesting that a range of skin tones existed amongst the ancient Egyptians.

In his build-up to the description of the Graeco-Persian Wars, Herodotus describes how the Persians conquered Asia Minor, including the cities of the Ionian Greeks, and how they also conquered Egypt. Subsequent expeditions against the Ethiopians failed, and Herodotus also describes an early example of asymmetrical warfare when he relates how King Darius invaded the lands of the Scythians with a huge army, via Thrace. Being a nomadic people with no cities to defend, the Scythians simply moved away from Darius, driving their herds with them and always keeping at least a day’s march between themselves and the Persian Army. Darius could do nothing other than simply wander about the plains until his supplies ran out and he had to retreat back across the Danube.

The most dramatic part of the book is of course around the Persian invasions of Greece. The stories of the battles of Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis and Plataea are well-known, but it was great to read the original source material for these events.

There are times when Herodotus gets a little tiresome for the modern reader, and there’s too much mythology in here, but ultimately I’m really glad that I’ve finally read “The Histories.”

“Only YOU would go around carrying a copy of Herodotus.”

What did my friend Richard Halverson mean by ‘only YOU?’

Doesn’t everyone find the big H. interesting and funny?

My summers as music apprentice at Chautauqua Opera gave me tons and tons of free time and (if you’ve ever been there, you know) opportunity to read things outside any syllabus.
While waiting for some prima donna director to mount the perfect ‘Turandot’ I spent hours buried in ‘The Histories.’

Now, I am re-reading this – and finding it as wonderful as before.

Herodotus is not your ordinary historian. He makes things up (my kind of guy). He uses legends and dialogue to explain things—but then again if it weren't for Herodotus there would be no historians.
Herodotus' account is vivid, pertinent, exciting, insightful, and often hilarious as he recounts the people, places, customs, and occurrences in early Greece leading up to the Persian invasion.

Perhaps the most significant portion of this book deals with Xerxes and his invasion of Greece. This story contains the famous Battle of Thermopylae in which the 300 Spartans hold the Persians at bay.
Herodotus bridged the gap between oral story telling and the more detailed factual accounts of later writers, such as Thucydides. Fantastic, readable if not completely reliable!

Unreal book, at the intersection of Greek, Lydian, Persian and Egyptian history, and at the intersection of history and legend. Full of fascinating anecdotes and surmises, signs and wonders.

********************
*The Histories by Herodotus TBR
*Herodotus: The Father of History TBR
*Travels with Herodotus by Ryszard Kapuściński TBR
*The Life of Greece by Will Durant 5 stars
*24 Hours in Ancient Athens: A Day in the Life of the People Who Lived There by Philip Matyszak 3 stars

Really enjoyable. Herodotus nails down the social and political fabric of his reality in a sprawling, widely digressive work that serves as history, social commentary, geography, philosophy, and scientific rumination all at once without ever reducing to any one of these. Sure, you need an atlas and probably a glossary to keep track of all the places and names, and yes there are many inaccuracies, but that's the point, the ancient world can be a big, messy, place, and nothing is too big or too small to escape commentary. An inquiry of what happens when two separate civilizations meet and are forced to interact (not to mention the starting point for all further issues regarding 'east vs. west')? Check. Examinations of the movements and actions taking place during battles which regularly involve over 5,500,000 people? Check. A brief lesson on the spawning habits of Nile river fish? Check. An oral history of local customs and folk-lore told from opposing perspectives which forces the reader to filter through and actively engage with the beliefs of this age? Check. Twenty five centuries later, and still lively.