Mark Casey's Comments on Hero...

Comments on Herodotus
markcasey@gmail.com
Color code: Mark = black; Tim = blue

JULY 2007 -- Book VII

The decision for the Persians to invade Greece is highly significant. Starting in Book 7, chapter 8, what are Xerxes' reasons for doing so? Are they based on national security? Personal revenge? Tradition? Anything else? After Xerxes' dreams convince the Persians to invade, does that make Mardonios' reasons any stronger? Why or why not?

In chapters 27-29, Pythios voluntarily offers Xerxes a great amount of resources to help the war effort. Xerxes appreciates the offer, but becomes angry at Pythios soon after (38-39). Is Xerxes justified in doing so? Does this story, which surrounds Xerxes' order to 'punish' the Hellespont, show Xerxes' madness? wisdom?

The Ancient Greeks believed that "hubris" or 'overweening pride' would lead to a just punishment from the gods. In which instances in Book 7, does Herodotus show Xerxes' "hubris?" In which instances is Xerxes prudent? How does Xerxes compare with his predecessor Darius in balancing "hubris" with prudence?

Before the crossing of the Hellespont, Xerxes and Artabanos have a dialogue that begins with the 'shortness of human life' (chs. 46-52). Both Xerxes and Artabanos have differing views on this and on the coming invasion of Greece. How does Xerxes justify his position vis-a-vis Artabanos? Given the situation and regardless of the outcome, do either Xerxes or Artabanos have the stronger argument?

Given Xerxes' decision to allow the three captured Greek spies to see his whole Persian force (ch. 147), what is Xerxes' strategy as he approaches Thermopylae? Even with the exiled Spartan king Demaratos' advice, what does Xerxes nevertheless cling to as his military advantange? What advantage to the Greeks is Xerxes constantly overlooking? Why?

The Delphic oracle predicted for the Spartans that "either their city must be laid waste by the foreigner or a Spartan king be killed" (ch. 220). Was this the main reason Leonidas decided to remain at Thermopylae? What other reasons are there? Was the battle of Thermopylae militarily significant or merely symbolic?

What are your favorite stories from Book 7? Which, if any, have you heard about before in movies, books or popular media?

JUNE 2007 -- Books VI

1. Herodotus tells the reader that in his opinion "if, after being captured alive, Histiaeos had been taken to Darius, I suppose that Darius would have forgiven him for his offense and that he would have suffered no harm" (437). Knowing what we know about Darius in the Histories, would that be an accurate prediction? Why does Herodotus feel this way and what evidence from earlier in our reading could support his assertion?

Yes, I think Herodotus's prediction would have turned out to be accurate.

Interestingly, in 6.30 Artaphrenes and Harpagos seem to have shared Herodotus's opinion that Darius would have forgiven Histiaeus.

Darius was in many ways a pretty merciful guy, especially when he was victorious.

Keep in mind, he had to have a servant remind him every night at dinner to punish the Athenians. A truly vengeful guy wouldn't have needed that.
In 3.132 he provided for Democedes and spared the lives of people Democedes asked him to spare. Later, even though Democedes fled Persia after tricking Darius into sending ships to Hellas, Darius didn't pursue him to seek vengeance, but instead let him live out his life with his wrestler's daughter of a wife.
In 6.24 he provided for Sycthes, who had intended to harbor the Samians who had revolted against Darius (until the both the Samians and Hippocrates screwed him).
In 6.41 he provided for Metiochos and set him up with a Persian woman.
In 6.119 he changed his mind and didn't punish his Eretrian captives, but instead set them up on what sounds like reasonably nice land.
In 7.136 Darius took pride in not killing the two Spartans sent to Darius to accept punishment for the murder of two Persian heralds by the Spartans.
In 7.194 Darius changed his mind mid-execution and took Sandokes back down from the stake, sparing his life.

Histiaeus was particularly beloved by Darius

Histiaeus essentially saved Darius's army from disaster in Scythia by keeping that bridge up in 4.137.
Whether he was tricking Histiaeus or not with what he said in 5.24 -- "be my table companion and counselor" -- it's clear Darius dined with Histiaeus and set him up well.

Histiaeus didn't cause any real harm to Darius.

The Ionian revolts weren't successful in any meaningful way.
In fact they gave Darius a good pretext for moving into Hellas.

Bottom line, I don't get the sense that Darius was very vengeful by the standards of the day. He seems to have delighted in showing magnanimous hospitality to foreigners, particularly when he was the victor. When he was the loser, I agree he was tougher. But in this case he was the victor.

2. In chs. 51-55, Herodotus digresses on the origins of the Spartan dual kingship. He comments on both the Spartan version and the common Greek traditional version. What are we to make of the story? Is Herodotus favoring one or the other? Are there other versions deliberately not mentioned by Herodotus? Why does Herodotus suddenly proclaim: "let that be the extent of what is said on this topic" (449)?

I think Herodotus comes down on the side of the leaders of the Dorians having been of Egyptian descent.

He doesn't explicitly negate the story about the twins, but does point out that only the Lacedaemonians tell it, and also points out that "no poet agrees with them in this."
He doesn't explicitly endorse "what other Hellenes report" when the tells the story.
But, he points out that the wife of Perseus (Danae) must have descended from Egyptians.
Also, he points out that the Persian story of the grandfather of Perseus (Akrisios) was descented from Egyptians.
He decides not to continue with the story, referring the reader to the fact that "others have told of the deeds they performed to obtain their positions as kings over the Dorians even though they were Egyptians."

Why might Herodotus favor the Hellenic and Persian stories?

They fit well with his theory that the Egyptians are the oldest people on earth.
Herodotus was an Ionian, and might have liked thinking the Ionians were the "real" Greeks, with the Dorians having descended from Egyptians.

3. In ch. 84, Herodotus presents various views on the Spartan king Kleomenes' madness and eventual death. After presenting the Argive and Spartan explanations, Herodotus claims: "For myself, I think that the best explanation is that Kleomenes was punished for his treatment of Demaratos" (460). What does this say about Herodotus' judgment? Is he taking sides or does he have justification, according to his evidence, that his assertion has credence? What does this remark say about Herodotus' regard for history in general?

I think it's funny that as soon as Kleomenes dies, everyone has a theory on what the gods punished him for:

Many Hellenes say it was because he bribed the Pythia.
The Athenians say it was because he ravaged sacred territory when he invaded Eleusis.
The Argives say it was because he burned a sacred grove and killed men hiding there.
The Spartans say the gods didn't make Kleomenes crazy, but that he drank too much undiluted wine.
Herodotus says he was punished for the way he treated Demaratos (which includes bribing the Pythia), but I don't think he marshals any evidence to show that Kleomenes was punished for this and not for something else.

At some points, Herodotus seems hostile to Kleomenes

In 5.39 he says Kleomenes held his position "not by virtue of merit and valor, but rather by priority of birth." That seems a harsh thing to point out for Kleomenes in particular when essentially all monarchs get their positions the same way. Perhaps Herodotus was using this sentence to say he thought Kleomenes was especially undeserving of the position of king.

At other points, Herodotus seems sympathetic to Kleomenes, or at least says things that mitigate how bad he was.

In 3.148 he says "Kleomenes proved himself to be the most just of men" for not being bribed by Maiandrios and by having him expelled from Sparta.
In 6.61 he praises Kleomenes for "trying to work for the common good" in Aegina while Demaratos, motivated by "jealousy and malice," tried to undermine him.

In 6.64 he says that "what had happened was destined to become known and would bring the reign of Demaratos to an end." If it was destiny that brought this about, should Herodotus (and the gods) really ascribe agency and therefore guilt to Kleomenes? This is confusing.
In 5.41 Herodotus makes it seem as though Kleomenes was slightly mad even as a child, well before he conspired against Demaratos. If so, why should we ascribe the madness to punishment for Demaratos?

Maybe by ascribing the fate of Kleomenes to his treatment of Demaratos is Herodotus expressing his belief that bribing the Pythia and undermining a king are especially egregious violations of sacred law.

4. Herodotus uses 94 chapters to set the stage for one of the most important battles in history. Given the actual details of the battle, why does Herodotus not go into more detail about the individuals and events on the battlefield? How does Herodotus contrast the Athenians to the Persians in this conflict? How is Sparta compared/contrasted with Athens? Persia??

Why doesn't Herodotus get more into the details of the battle?

That's a great question. I don't have a great answer.
Perhaps, unlike Thucydides, who was a general and very interested in military maneuvering, he just wasn't that interested in battlefield detail.

It's interesting that he tells us about a man suddenly stricken blind. I think Thucydides would have thought "who cares?" But H likes these "wonders."
Similarly, he tells us about Hippias's dream and lost tooth, two other things Thucydides would probably have ignored.

Perhaps he was thinking ahead to the much more important future battles at Thermopylae, etc. and not wanting to get too detailed at this point.
Perhaps he simply didn't have good enough information on the battle to report it well.

The Spartans

They're very quick to agree to send help to Athens.
They're very quick to march to Marathon once they get going (150 miles in 3 days).
But, they end up not taking part in the battle of Marathon because for some reason a religious tradition prevents them from marching before a full moon.
The cynical interpretation would be that they didn't want to send troops (fear of defeat? tied up with Helot revolt?) and used this "religious tradition" as a pretext.
However, I'm inclined to believe (based on Thucydides) they were sincere about their religious tradition.
Herodotus mentions in 5.63 that the Spartans "considered the concerns of the god to be of higher priority than those of men."

The Athenians

In some ways they're really decisive.

In 6.100 they immediately offer 4k troops to the embattled Eretrians.
In 6.100 they immediately flee Eretria when told to do so by Aischines (though this could be self-serving ex-post justification).
In 6.103 when the Persians make for Marathon, "the Athenians rushed to Marathon to defend it themselves."
In 6.104 they decisively realize they need help and send a professional runner to Sparta.

In some ways they're indecisive.

Five generals want to fight; five generals aren't sure.
This rotating generalship idea seems weird. I wonder why they chose it.

The Athenians are brave. Their first instinct is to fight, not to flee/surrender. Herodotus gives them credit for being the "first to endure the sight of the Medes' clothing and the men wearing it" (6.112). [That must have been some pretty scary looking clothing.]
The Athenians say they're thinking about Hellas, not just themselves. In 6.106 "thus Hellas has become weaker by one important city."
The Athenians are conscious of their own glory. In 6.109 Miltiades says, "if this city prevails, it can become the first among all Greek cities."
The Athenians are political.

Even though the other generals delegate their responsibility to Miltiades, he waits until it's his day (6.110). Why, unless he's making sure he gets all the credit?
Miltiades makes the point that if the Athenians continue to be indecisive, they'll fall to internal strife and Medize.

The Athenians are innovative. Rather than do the slow march of the phalanx, they are the "first of all Hellenes we know of to use the running charge" (6.112).
The Athenians are tricky. The strategy of using a weak center and strong wings cleverly traps the advancing Persians (6.113).
The Athenians are successful. 192 men killed vs. 6,400 for the Persians? (C'mon!)

The Persians

They're well staffed. Lots of men, ships, horses. (This may be exaggerated by Herodotus, however.)
They're not sophisticated sailors. They get pummeled at Mouth Athos, and are scared to sail by there again.
They're ruthless at times. Naxos. Karysots. (My favorite line: "So the Persians besieged the city and ravaged the land until the Karystians adopted the Persian way of thinking and came over to their side." (6.99))
They're disrespectful of local gods, setting fire to sanctuaries in Naxos and on Eretria (the latter in revenge for what was done to them in Sardis.)
They're over-confident.

They linger a few days after defeating the Eretrians rather than press their advantage and take Athens before allies can join to help.
They assume the charging Athenians are crazy rather than see the idea behind the tactic.

They're presented by Herodotus as easily killed. 6,400 dead vs. 192 makes the Persians seem like poor fighters.

5. Ch. 121 just seems to leap out of nowhere. After a description of the battle of Marathon and Sparta's late arrival, Herodotus seems eager to address the veracity of Alkmeonid treachery against Athens: "I am astonished by that story about the Alkmeonids" (478). He then goes on to elaborate on the Alkmeonid clan, seemingly making an appeal for them, through chapter 131. How convincing is his defense? Why does Herodotus make this appeal here? What sort of tensions are betrayed in Herodotus' words that show the movement between myth and history, fact and fiction?

MAY / JUNE 2007 -- Books IV and V

1. As invaders, the Persians are considered a formidable foe. In Book IV, how does Darius carry out the declaration of war against the Scythians? What is Darius really after? How do the Scythians and their neighbors prepare for the Persian invasion? What might Herodotus be foreshadowing with respect to the eventual Persian invasion of Greece?

2. Given that Ionians were willingly helping Darius in his invasion of Scythia in Book IV, what are the conditions that lead to their revolt in Book V?

3. What does Herodotus reveal about the state of Greek city-state politics in Book V, especially between Sparta and Athens? How might this foreshadow political relations in the larger Persian-Greek clashes of Books VII, VIII & IX?

4. What are your favorite stories, anecdotes or digressions from Books IV & V?

MAY 2007 -- Comments on "The Oracle: Ancient Delphi and the Science Behind its Lost Secrets" by William J. Broad (Pengiun Books, 2006)

Bottom line: this book is well worth reading if you want to know more about the history of the Oracle of Delphi. It's 240 gripping, well-written, easy to read pages. It really brought the Oracle to life for me, and made me even more impressed with how truly significant an institution the Oracle was in the Hellenic world.

The first chapter (70 pages or so) talks about what we know of the Oracle from historical / literary sources, including Plutarch, Herodotus, Homer, Plato, etc. There are lots of fascinating nuggets in here, and I recount some of them below
The second chapter (26 pages or so) talks about how in 1891 the French got the exclusive rights from the Greeks to exhume/dig up Delphi. They were especially hoping to find some physical proof that, as the ancients claimed, the Oracle did indeed sit in a room filled with a "pneuma" -- vapors that rose from the Earth and allowed the Oracle to commune with Apolla. But, they found not the slightest bit of physical evidence to support this, and French scholars wrote, from 1906 to the late 1920s, a series of devastating rebukes to the notion that the pneuma could ever have existed.
The third, fourth, and fifth chapters (94 pages or so) talk about how two American scholars -- geologist Jelle De Boer and archaeologist John Hale -- each for his own reasons became interested in Delphi. The two met randomly, discovered their shared interest, and agreed to investigate their pet theory that the geology of Delphi did in fact make possible the pneuma. The book then tells a great scientific detective story about how these men used scientific sources (e.g. geological records, satellite photos, topical relief maps, reports written about hydrocarbon explorations), their own observations (they sleuthed around Delphi to observe the landscape themselves, and they visited other Greek sites like Thermopylae to see how the volcanic vents worked there), and ancient historical sources (at one point they visit a tar pit mentioned by Herodotus and there develop a key insight into how volcanic vents work) to figure out and prove that the Oracle's special room in the Temple of Apollo at Delphi (the "adyton") was in fact directly on top of the intersection between two geographic fault lines that could have allowed a number of gases derived from hydrocarbons (especially ethylene) to fill the room from which the Oracle made her divinations.
The sixth chapter (25 pages or so) describes how Hale meets another research -- Kentucky Poison Control Center director Henry Spiller -- who takes it upon himself to figure out exactly what impact the gases from the vents under Delphi would have had on someone who inhaled them regularly. There is a delightful scene in which Spiller converts his back yard tool shed into a mock up of the Oracle's divination room, pumps it full of ethylene, and sits inside it with a few friends to see what it's like. Sure enough, they get a little high and go into a rapture of sorts.
In the last chapter (22 pages or so) the author tries to make the case that there was more to the Oracle than just getting high on ethylene fumes. I think he does a good job with parts of this argument. At moments, however, he verges on arguing that perhaps the Oracle really did have ESP, etc. and those arguments aren't nearly as strong.

A few nuggets about the Oracle of Delphi

The longevity of the institution of the Oracle(s) at Delphi is even more impressive than I thought -- 12 to 13 centuries!

Delphi started attracting various types of worshippers as early as 1600 BC
Delphi converted to a site devoted to Apollo somewhere between 1100 BC and 900 BC; this is when the Oracle tradition begins
Delphi's accessibility increased enormously in 590 BC after its army destroyed a town (Crisa) that had been charging tolls to pilgrims.
In 373 BC an earthquake destroyed the temple of Apollo
In 356 BC a war was fought over Delphi's treasury. By now the Oracle wasn't being consulted on matters of state policy any longer.
In 146 BC the Romans conquered Corinth; their absorption of Greece wasn't good for Delphi in general
Around 80 BC the Oracle enjoyed a brief renaissance.
Christianity was what really caused the demise of the Oracle. The Christians didn't dispute that she had mystic powers, but ascribed them to Satan.
In 313 AD Constantine converted to Christianity, accelerating the decline of pagan religions in the Roman empire
In 361 AD Roman Emporer Julian the Apostate, a lover of Greek religions and not a fan of Christianity, attempted one last revival of the Oracle, but his reign was short, and the institution ended along with it.
The Oracle's last forecast, made in response to a question from Julian the Apostate:

Tell the king, the fair-wrought house has fallen.
No shelter has Apollo, nor sacred laurel leaves.
The fountains are now silent; the voice is stilled.

A few comments about the mechanics of the institution

The Oracles were women chosen from among the citizens of Delphi.

Originally they had to be young virgins, but after one Oracle was raped, the decision was made to choose 50+ year olds instead

These women were thought of as people with ordinary powers through whom Apollo spoke.
To be an Oracle at Delphi was among the highest status jobs a Hellenic woman could have.
The job came with plenty of perks, including front row seats at the theater.

The Oracles answered questions one day per month, 9 months per year

They answered questions on the 7th day of the month -- a day thought sacred to Apollo.
They did not work during the winter. Hale and De Boer believe this is because they hydrocarbon vapors depended on heat to evaporate. This phenomenon is seen in some other hydrocarbon vents around the world.
(During the winter Delphi's focus became not Apollo, but Dionysus, and all sorts of orgiastic revelry took place there.)
To put a question to the Oracle, you had to pay a nominal fee and sacrifice an animal. A goat was the preferred sacrifice. They omens from the sacrifice (e.g. condition of the liver; shaking of the ankles after water was poured on the goat) had to be just right, or you weren't allowed to see the Oracle.
The order of questioners was determined by the drawing of lots, though major patrons of the institution (e.g. Croesus) could get priority.
You were allowed to ask one single question of the Oracle. You'd ask the question to a priest, who would then ask the Oracle. There is some debate as to whether you'd hear back directly from the Oracle or via the priest, but increasingly it seems the consensus is that you'd hear back directly from the Oracle.

How the Oracles answered

The Oracle sometimes spoke in verse, but as time went on more frequently spoke in prose.
The Oracle answered lots of personal questions -- e.g. should my son get married now or wait? -- but was relatively unique in the Hellenic world for also being relied on for major questions involving state policy.
Historian Catherine Morgan argues that the oracles gave more precise answers in the first few centuries than they did in the last several. She speculates that the prophecy given to Croesus -- "you will destroy a great empire" -- was a turning point in the Oracle's approach, from more specific to more ambiguous

A few comments about the centrality of Delphi in the Hellenic world

Delphi was an even bigger deal than I thought (and I already thought it was a huge deal)
Delphi was thought to be the spiritual and physical center of the world.

The exact spot of the center was marked by a conical stone called the "omphalos."
De Boer believes this stone may have sat directly over the vent, acting as a chimney of sorts, funneling hydrocarbons into the Oracle's room.

Delphi became unbelievably wealthy over time.

There were literally thousands of statues on the (very small) site.
Hellenic city states competed to have the most extravagant treasuries there.
Nearly every new colony asked the Oracle for advice on where to go, and these colonies sent back gifts and payments as they succeeded.

In 582 Delphi started the Pythian Games, a quadrennial athletic competition that rivalled the Olympic games.

The Oracles' impact on a few famous men

Socrates said late in life that his pursuit of self knowledge was inspired in large part by an oracle he received while young, saying, no man was wiser than he. He said he was so mystified by this oracle, and so driven to understand why he had received it, that he pursued that question for the rest of his life, in a way trying to live up to the oracle. (That's quite a statement from one of the most brilliant people of all time.)
Plato gave pride of place to the Oracle at Delphi in his "Republic" and some other Socratic dialogs, saying something to the effect of, "religious law universally should be fetched from Delphi."
Aristotle didn't talk much about the Oracle at Delphi, but did write a treatise on the subject of telepathy, which the Oracle was thought to possess.
Cicero was inspired by the Oracle, who told him "make your own nature, not the opinion of others, your guide in life."
Plutarch was the high priest at Delphi for decades starting from around 90BC.

The philosophy of the Oracles

The Oracles tended to espouse an ethical philosophy that was radical at the time, and compared to prevailing mores, relatively humanistic and liberal
The Oracles tended to stress the importance of intention -- not just outcome -- in determining guilt. Unlike many Greeks at the time, they considered it morally worse to try to kill someone and fail than to kill someone by accident.
The Oracles tended to tell people to rely more on their own conscience than would be typical in a shame society.
The Oracles tended to recommend forgiveness rather than dogmatic adherence to strict codes (like blood vengeance).
The Oracles tended to prefer honesty poverty and to disdain garish pomposity (though that didn't keep them from doing business with Croesus).
The Oracles tended to tell people to respect local customs and religions (much as Herodotus seems to have done).
The Oracles tended to be big proponents of freeing slaves.
"Know thyself" was written over one door to the temple
"Avoid extremes" was written over another door to the temple

MAY 2007 -- BOOK 3

The rise and fall of Cambyses.

How does Herodotus measure the sanity of Cambyses?
- Kills a god -- the epiphany of Aphis

Kills his brother -- the murder of Smerdis

Cambyses jealous because Smerdis can draw Ethiopian bow a little bit.
Orders Prexaspes to kill his brother

Kills his sister/wife, who was pregnant at the time

Note, he had to get special dispensation from judges to marry her in the first place
He slew her because she either wept over or criticized him for killing Smerdis

Kills son of Prexaspes with a bow and arrow. "If I hit him in the heart, the Persians are mad, not me." Reacts with glee to see he hit him in the heart.

Later, for no reason buried 12 first rank Persians up to their heads

Offences against religion

Opens graves in Memphis
Mocks statue at sanctuary of Hephaistos
Mocks and burns statues at sanctuary of Kabeiroi

Bottom line reasons Herodotus gives

It is human nature to believe one's customs are the best in the world. The value people put on their own customs is so high, that only a madman would treat them as laughing matter and mock them, the way Cambyses did.
Herodotus also points out that Cambyses may have had epilepsy from birth, and that this may have affected his mental state.

What does Herodotus mean by "custom is king of all" (3.38.4)?

It's difficult to define right and wrong outside of custom. Custom can make it either right or wrong to eat your dead parents.
It's difficult for anyone, even a king, to violate customs without being punished

In Book I, Candaules made Gyges look at his naked wife, and suffered the loss of his kingdom as a result
In Book III, Croesus warns Cambyses that the people will revolt if he breaks customs too much.

The statement could also be taken to mean that customs (or what we might today call "culture") dictate the vast majority of what people do in their day to day lives, and also dictate -- or at least guide and constrain -- what organizations and nations do as well. The more I analyze businesses for my job as an investment analyst, the more important I think corporate culture is to determining the success or failure of a business.

[Tim Albright]
Here is a translation of the Pindar fragment from which the "custom is king" phrase comes from:

Nomos-Basileus fragment

1. (S 214)
Custom (nomos), king (basileus) of all,
of mortals and immortals,
takes up and justifies what is most violent
with a supremely high hand. As evidence,
I cite the deeds of Heracles:
for he drove the cattle of Geryon
to the Cyclopean courtyard of Eurystheus
without paying, and when they were not for sale.
It was he, too, who stole the horses
of Diomedes after conquering
the Kikonian king by the marsh of Bisto,
although Diomedes, the wonderful son
of bronze-armed Enualios,
stood up to Heracles, the great son of Zeus,
not out of greed but because of his valor (arête).
For it is better to die defending property
that is being stolen than to live on as a weakling.
Heracles secretly entered the great
house by night and took the road
of physical violence.

2. (S 215)
Different customary rules (nomina) for different people;
each man praises his own justice (dike).

As the actions unfold, a literary arc starts to emerge about the custom question. You rightly note that even a king can't go against custom and meet a good end, and the oracle tracking is quite revealing. I would also add that Croesus is a kind of protean character or touchstone for a lot of other events. Amasis comes out quite favorably because of his respect for customs and signs of all kinds. This is all building up a case as we arrive at Darius, the first Persian invader. Seems like the first justifications for the improbable Greek victory are being laid. Note also (2.120) the way H. sums up the moral of the Trojan War: "when great injustices are committed, retribution from the gods is also great."

[Note, the table is by Tim as well]

Section	Actor	Action (tempting fate by violating custom)	Comment
1.8	Kandaules	Forces Gyges to view the queen naked.	Queen and Gyges plot his death and the oracles confirm his kingship.
1.5.3	Croesus	"first [Asian Ruler] to begin unjust acts against the Hellenes…". This is part of the famous speech about cities lesser and greater.	Croesus is a protean character
1.34.1	Croesus	foolishness with Solon where assumes he is the happiest of men	gods punish him
1.34 - 43	Croesus	distrusts the message of his dream and lets Adrastos protect his son Atys.	Atys gets killed by Adrastos.
1.46.1- 2 1.50 -53	Croesus	tests the oracles.
1.54	Croesus	despite his oracle testing, he misinterprets the oracle about which empire will be destroyed.
1.55.2 …	Croesus	Misunderstands the parable of the mule.becoming king of the Medes
1.90	Croesus	Sends shackles to Delphi and reproaches Apollo for deceiving him about the empire business.
1.155	Cyrus	Sends Croesus to keep care of Cambyses
2.172.2 - 5	Amasis	After becoming king, Amas wins over the Egyptians with his "cleverness and sensible tact: the golden foot basin cum statue convinces the Egyptiand to consider it "just to becaome his slaves."	This often takes the form of following proper custom.
2.174.2	Amasis	Ignores Oracles as false if they do not condemn his thievery; gives special care to the oracles who denounce him because they are "true".
2.175	Amasis	Amasis builds major monuments and important shrines.
2.177	Amasis	Egypt prospers
2.177.2	Amasis	Establishes income declaration law that is adopted by Solon of Athens.	H. notes that it is a "an admirable law, and may it always remain in force."
2.178.2	Amasis	Creates the "Hellenion"	The sanctuary "belongs" to the Greeks who found precincts for Greek gods.
2.180	Amasis	Along with Greeks, he contributes large sums to rebuild Delphi.
2.181.1 - 5	Amasis	Marries a Greek woman (Ladike), who appeals successfully to Aphrodite to remove Amasis' impotence.	She fulfills her vow to the goddess by having a statue made, still visible to H.
2.182.1 - 2	Amasis	Gives many offerings to other Greek cities, some of which included guest-friendship.
3.1 -3.5	Cambyses	Invades Egypt because Amasis sends a substitute instead of his own daughter.
3.14.1 - 2, 3.14.7 -9	Cambyses	humiliates Egyptian nobles (but spares Psammenitos)
3.16	Cambyses	Abuses Amasis' corpse violating customs of Egyptians, Greeks, and Persians. The body is whipped, stabbed, plucked of hair, et cetera	mortally wounds himself in the same spot on the thigh.
3.16.5 - 6	Amasis	May have supplanted another corpse in his stead for Cambyses' ultimate abuse (though herodotus doubts this).
3.27 - 29	Cambyses	Punishes the Egyptions by stabbing Apis in his festival
3.30.4, 3.62.1. 3.65.1	Cambyses	Dreams Smerdis will supplant him and orders his fratricide
3.33	Cambyses	Might have epilepsy: serious illness of body and mind.
3.31 - 32	Cambyses	Marries his two sisters, then kills one because she reminds him too much of his own murder of Smerdis.
3.35	Cambyses	Kills son of Prexaspes (whom he honored most among Persions!!) because of Prexaspes' comments on Cambyses' fondness for wine. Especially heinous because he shoots the son with an arrow then has the body examined to see if he struck the heart. Cambyses bursts out laughing with glee and says to the father: "See I am not mad."
3.35.5	Cambyses	Buries alive ("up to their heads") 12 PERSIAN peers of the first rank.
3.36	Cambyses	Orders Croesus killed for his advice. The Persians do not kill Croesus. While Cambyses is eventually pleased with this, he murders the Persians who did not kill Croesus because they disobeyed his orders.
3.37.1	Cambyses	Opens ancient graves and inspects the corpses (ick).
3.37.2	Cambyses	Mocks the cult statue in the sanctuary of Hephaistos.
3.37.3	Cambyses	Enters the snctuary of the Kabeiroi, mocking then destroying the statues (which resemble Hephaistos and are said to represent his sons).
3.38.2	Cambyses	H. comments that only a madman would treat his own peoples' customs in such a laughing manner.
3.38.3 - 4	Darius	Eating versus burning the dead example.
3.40 - 41	Amasis	Reappears in the story about his friend and ally Polykrates and the ring-eating fish.	Here again, Amasis correctly interprets all signs and justly advises his friend. I see this in direct oppostion to the way Croesus handles custom and "what's right". Amasis cautions Polykrates against thinking he is TOO fortunate. Then, when the ring comes back, Amasis correctly realizes he is doomed.

How does Cambyses take advice and counsel in comparison with his predecessor Cyrus?

Poorly. Cyrus is terrific at taking advice, and learns a lot from Croesus in particular. Croesus tries to advise Cambyses to calm down, but he flies into a rage, blaming Croesus for giving bad advice to Cyrus, and tries to kill him; eventually killing only the men who protected Croesus from Cambyses (3.36).
It doesn't seem like Cambyses even asked for advice before sending his ill-equipped armies marching across the desert in their disastrous attempt to attack the Ethiopians.

How should we view the transfer of power from Cambyses to Darius? Is this a monarchy? Despotism? Tyranny? Oligarchy?

These are are difficult terms to define.
Tyranny. In its historical usage, a tyrant wasn't necessarily a bad or cruel ruler, but rather someone who had gained his power via his own means, rather than through heredity (as in a monarchy) or through constitutional or electoral transfer of some sort. Since Darius was not a son or even relative of Cambyses, his rule was at least in this way a tyranny.
Oligarchy. It's like an oligarchy in that a small number of families (those of the seven co-conspirators) have special privileges and powers. But the powers they given themselves -- the ability to see the king without being introduced first -- aren't much to brag about. The relative levels of power possessed by the king and families of the co-conspirators seems to suggest this was more of a monarchy or despotism than an oligarchy.
Monarchy or despotism. I'm not very clear on the difference between the two, but I suspect Darius's reign was more of a despotism than a monarchy. Slavery was a bigger part of Darius's empire than I would think it to be in the typical monarchy, and my guess is the people at the lower levels of Darius's society had far fewer legal rights than we would think of peasants having in a monarchy. The legal notion at the time was that the King was entirely above the law (remember the ruling the judges gave Cambyses), and I usually think of monarchs as perhaps above the law in some ways, but not above the law in all ways.

Darius and Democedes (3.129)

What does this story show about Darius' encounter with the Greeks?

Main themes

Darius is an enslaver; Democedes is a freedom-seeker
Darius is a cruel killer of his own men; Democedes is more humane
Darius thinks gold and power are everything; Democedes values liberty, his home, the gods
Darius is manipulated by Greek cunning; Democedes is wily and clever
The Persians are powerless in Hellas (pinned down in Tara; can't get Demo from Croton; shipwrecked in Italy; can't return Gillos to Taras)

Details

Democedes thinks from the beginning that working for Darius means enslavement (3.130), and in fact it does. Darius thinks gold will make Democedes happy, but he really wants liberty. "He lacked for nothing except permission to return to Hellas" (3.132). I like the bit about Democedes as a youth fleeing his angry father -- the son's character persists later in life.

Democedes shows humanity / mercy to people Darius would kill (Egyptian physicians and a prophet of Elis -- a tip of the hat to Democedes' piety?)

Democedes shows himself to be a wily Greek schemer, getting Darius' wife to convince him to scout out Greece, with Democedes as chief scout.

Aristophilides, king of Taras, is friendly to Democedes, and immobilizes the Persian spies as Democedes gets away.

The Persians confront runaway Democedes in the marketplace (a quintessentially Greek institution) at Croton. The Persians threaten those defending Democedes with the King's wrath and eventual enslavement, but the plucky Greeks aren't persuaded and stand by Democedes. An early Greek victory against invading Persians trying to keep enslaved one of their own.

In trying to leave Greece without their guide, the Persians are shipwrecked in Italy and enslaved, but rescued by Gillos, an exile of Taras (the city who's king allowed Democedes to escape in the first place), and brought back to Darius.

Again, however, the Persians (or in this case the Cnidians) fail to accomplish what they want in Hellas, as the Tarantines refuse to accept Gillos the exile. "The Cnidians obeyed Darius but could not make the Tarantines comply and had no power to user force against them" (3.138).

What does this story have to do with the story that ends Book 3, i.e. Zopyrus and the fall of Babylonia to Darius?

Theme of Persian powerlessness abroad. The direct attack approach used by Darius against Babylon fails.
Theme of cunning coming from someone other than Darius. Zopyros is the brain behind the operation, not Darius.
Theme of Darius's cruelty / enslavement mentality. The scheme relies on Darius's willingness to sacrifice the lives of 7,000 of his troops. My guess is that the average Greek would have found this idea abhorrent. I'm less sure they would have found the impaling of 3,000 high ranking Babylonians abhorrent -- just desserts for faild rebels? -- but it's a testament to Darius's capacity to kill.
A line I'm puzzled by: why would Darius say he'd rather have Zopyros unmaimed than 20 Babylons? Just to sound humane? If he sincerely felt that towards Zopyros, it's amazing how huge the chasm of feeling is between those in Darius's inner circle vs. the simple plebs in his army.

A tidbit I found interesting: Book 3 begins with a story about how Cambyses decided to conquer Egypt because he was upset with the way Amasis treated his request for a daughter to marry. Herodotus points out that he had made this request of Amasis on the advice of an Egyptian doctor who resented the fact that Amasis sent him to be doctor to the King in Persia. So... Cambyses attacks Egypt in response to an exiled doctor's scheme, and Darius scouts out Greece for attack directly as a result of an exiled doctor's scheme. What petty reasons for two major military actions.

MAY 2007 -- BOOK 2

"As Herodotus introduces his long digression on Egypt with a reference to the conquest of the Greeks (c. I. 2), so he concludes with a similar reference."

How relevant is this comment to the Persians' eventual invasion of Greece?

The opening comment in Book 2 -- that Cambyses considered the Ionians and Aeolians as slaves inherited from his father, and used them when we waged war against the Egyptians -- seems relevant to the eventual invasion. It helps you understand the mindset of the Persian Kings towards neighboring Greeks. (My guess is that absolutely no Greek contemporaries of Herodotus felt the Persians were slaves they'd inherited from their parents.)
The closing comment in Book 2 -- that Amasis was the first man to capture Cyprus and subject it to payment of tribute -- seems less relevant to the invasion of Greece by the Persians, as it is about a move made by an Egyptian.

Even with a satisfactory observation, one may still be wondering 'what does Book 2 have to do with the Persian invasion of Greece?' Thoughts?

Many parts of the book -- e.g. the mummification of cats -- don't have much to do with the Persian invasion of Greece.
Herodotus thinks you have to go way back in time to understand the present. (He takes a 5 generation running start to get to Croesus, for example.) So, by telling us all about Egypt -- how old it is, and how unusual it is, and the 300 long line of Pharaohs -- he give us more perspective on (1) the growth of Persia's power through Cambyses's annexation of Egypt, (2) the mentality of Cambyses (ultimately he attacks Egypt for no good reason), and (3) the impressiveness of the Greeks (the Egyptians with all their history and magnificent buildings couldn't stand up to the Persians, but we Greeks did), in addition to (4) fulfilling his goal of recoding the deeds of men and telling us about "wonders."

Let's look at the claim of Herodotus' Hellenocentric point of view.

What do Herodotus' observations tell about Herodotus as a Greek?
Are his observations an attempt to re-define Egypt according to Greek culture?
Or is Herodotus too much influenced by Egyptian culture to make accurate statements in his History?

APRIL 2007 -- BOOK 1
Oracles

Gyges supported in obtaining Kandaules' kingdom by Oracle at Delphi (1.13). Those opposed to him agree to the oracle's decision. A way to settle a fight without bloodshed, if both sides agree to the judgement. (Oracle also says 4th descendent of Gyges -- Alyattes's son Croesus -- will suffer at hands of Heraklids, which everyone ignores, but the oracle is eventually proven correct.) Gyges returns the Oracle's favor by donating "an unbelievable amount of gold" to Delphi, which H says really means to the treasury of Kypselos. (Not sure if that was true when Gyges did it, or if Kypselos has taken control of the treasury since then; probably the latter.)
Alyattes becomes sick after temple of Athena of Assesos burns during his assault on Miletus (1.20). Oracle at Delphi refuses to give advice re: the sickness until Alyattes rebuilds the temple. (Way to stand up for fellow Oracles.) Miletus's tyrant, Thrasyboulos, finds out about the oracle, throws a fake banquet, which makes Alyattes think his strategy of starving the Milesians won't work, and he calls off his war on Miletus. Score another point for an Oracular prophecy leading to a non-violent outcome. Alyattes donates silver bowl and welded iron stand to Delphi.
Croesus

Tests the oracles (1.46). Delphi passes the test, guessing that he was making tortois / lamb soup in a bronze bowl. Croesus rewards Delphi with truly ridiculous levels of donation and sacrifice (3,000 of every kind of appropriate animal). Croesus also thinks Amphiareion is a true oracle, but we don't know what that oracle said.
Should I attack the Persians (1.53). "If you attack, you will destroy a great empire; make allies with the most powerful Hellenes." Oracle proven correct.
Will my reign last long (1.55). "Until a mule becomes king of the Medes." Oracle proven correct.
Question about mute son (1.85). Delphi says the day Croesus hears his mute son's voice will be a disaster. Oracle proven correct.
Calls out to Apollo while being burned (1.87). A storm begins, extinguishing the fire. Apollo successfully intervenes.
Blames the gods (1.90). "Fated destiny is impossible to avoid even for a god. Croesus had to atone for the wrong of his ancestor four generations ago."

Peisistratos is encouraged by an oracle about tuna swarming "through the moonlight night" to attack at night and return to Athens for the 3rd time (1.63). H says, "clearly the man who gave this oracle was divinely inspired." Again, the oracle is proven correct.
Lykourgos either receives laws from Delphi or is encouraged by the Pythia to create them (she tells him he is loved by the gods and essentially a god himself) (1.65). H gives two explanations of this, and doesn't seem to come down on either side. In any case, we know that Lykourgos's laws kept Sparta safe for hundreds of years, so the oracle was proven correct.
Sparta

Tegea. Lacedaemonians consult Delphi about the land in Arcadia (1.66) and take the answer to mean they should forget Arcadia, but attack Tegea. But, Tegea turns out to be a "dance floor" they tread in a line wearing the shackles they themselves brought to enslave the Tegeans. Oracle proven correct.
Orestes's bones. Spartans ask whom to propitiate so they can defeat the Tegeans (1.67). Delphi's riddle is interpreted to mean the bones of Orestes need to be returned from Tegea. Oracle proven correct.

Sycthian plunder of Aphrodite Ourania (1.105). As a result "the goddess inflicted the female disease upon" them. Don't mess with the oracle or you'll end up a hermaphrodite.
What to do with Paktyes (1.157).

Branchidai oracle says Cymaeans should hand him over to the Persians. Distinguished citizen says "don't," because he expects the sacred delegates aren't telling the truth. Ask again. Oracle says again to hand him over. Aristodikos still doesn't want to. Citizens don't want to ask again, and don't want to hand him over, so send him to Mytilene.
Paktyes is "torn from the sanctuary of Athena Poliochos" and handed to the Persians... for a price. No ill consequence for tearing a man from sanctuary.

Caereans atone for slaughter of Phocaeans (1.167). Delphi tells them what to do to atone (i.e. make sacrifices, hold athletic & equestrian competitions).
Cnidians trying to turn isthmus into island (1.174). Delphi says don't, as Zeus himself would have done this if he'd wanted it. This stops their eye injuries.

Dreams, signs, and omens

Croesus

Atys. Dreams he will lose his son Atys via an iron spear (1.34). Assigns Adrastos to protect Atys in boar hunt. Adrastos kills him instead. Classic example of incurring fate in trying to escape it. Prophecy of dream is fulfilled.
Snakes & horses. Horses eat snakes before the gates of Sardis (1.78). Croesus sent delegates to Priests of Apollo, who say the interpretation is that a foreign army will conquer Sardis. Sign proven correct.
Carrying of the lion around the walls of Sardis (1.84). Meles, an earlier king of Sardis, did not pass a certain very steep part of the wall with a lion (!) borne to him by a concubine, and it was that part of the wall that Cyrus's army scaled. Oracle proven correct. (Just like the story of Achilles's heel.)

Astyages

Dreams daughter urinated so copiously she flooded Asia. As a result of this dream he has his daughter marry not a Mede but a Persian. Bad call. Phrophecy of dream is fulfilled.
Dreams vine from daughter's genitals covers all of Asia. As a result of this dream he decides to kill his daughter's child. Phrophecy of dream is fulfilled.

Two levels of mis-delegation. Astyages to Harpagos. Harpagos to Mitradates. Child survives.
Magi says the dream was fulfilled with the boyhood game. Tells Aystages to send the 10 year old Cyrus to Persia. Terrible interpretation.

Pedasian priestess of Athena grows long beard. Turns out to portend a true calamity.
Cyrus dreams of Daris with wings casting shadows over Europe and Asia. Turns out to portend his own death.

What are some of your favorite stories from this first book?

How Gyges becomes king of the Lydians.
Solon's advice to Croesus (1.30) and how Croesus becomes wise late in life.
Poor Adrastos, killing himself over the tomb of Atys, son of Croesus (1.45). That's really sad.
How Peisistratos becomes a tyrant (making people think a common, but tall, villager is Athena) and angers Megakles by only having "indecent" intercourse with his daughter.
The "Battle of the Champions" (1.82). One Spartan standing, doesn't leave the battlefield, is distraught that he didn't die with his comrades, and commits suicide. Wow.
How Deiokes attains a tyrrany (1.96). Interesting how he decides being unseen by his peers will elevate him to the status of a superior.
I like how the Persians take advantage of the name of the herdman's wife (Kyno, which means bitch) to create an aura about Cyrus (1.122)
Cyrus's punishment of the River Gyndes by dividing it into 360 channels. Cra-zy! (1.189)
H's endorsement of the auction system of getting women married off -- fees paid for the beautiful are paid to those who marry the unattractive.
The Babylonian custom of women having to venerate Aphrodite by having sex with a stranger once per lifetime (1.199). Some women there 3-4 years?!

Herodotus says he will talk about not just great cities but small. How do Croesus and Cyrus serve as examples for this important part of Herodotus' philosophy?