Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/24307852?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Scuola Normale Superiore is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Classe di Lettere e Filosofia
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
782 P. A. STADTER
2 The preservation of the great deeds of the past was one object of Hero
dotus' work, clearly stated in the preamble, which I have no desire to deny. But
fame was intimately tied to the exemplum already in the epic: thus the impor
tance of Meleager's story for Achilles and of Agamemnon's for Odysseus.
3 See the analysis of the whole scene in H. Strasburger, Herodot und das
perikleische Athen, Historia, IV, 1955, 1-25 (reprinted in Herodot: Eine Auswahl
aus der neueren Forschung, ed. W. Marg, Darmstadt 1962, 574-608 and H. Stra
sburger, Studien zur alten Geschichte, Hildesheim 1982, II, 592-626) at 7-14. So
cles' speech is an excellent example of the ability of Herodotus' stories to func
tion on multiple levels. Besides the literal historical report of the speech, note:
1) the history of Periander, 2) the questioning of Spartan goals, both in 510 and
at the time of composition, 3) the importance of the Spartan decision, 4) the
growth of Athenian power and its effect on Sparta, 5) the vices of the tyrant, 6)
the theme of tyranny vs. freedom, 7) the relation of the divine to human affairs,
and 8) limit and the rise and fall of persons and cities.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 783
In this his stories of the past resemble the myths of the tra
gedians. Both were meant to provoke thinking about current
circumstances. The similarity is not surprising: both were
directed at the same general audience. The similarity be
tween tragedy and history is deeper than the tragic pessi
mism or elements of tragic plot structure or dialogue fre
quently found in Herodotus and Thucydides5. It lies in the
very nature of narrative, in which the story of the particular
is told to convey an understanding which is relevant to the
present. It is thus essential to explore the implications of
Herodotus' account in terms of the horizons of interest of
his contemporary audience.
Two assumptions underlie the inquiry, which there is
not space to argue here. First, the text of Herodotus which
we possess is a written document composed on the basis of
stories told or presentations given over a number of years,
from at least 440 until the 420's, in different cities and on
different occasions. On these occasions many factors would
have been fluid: the historical situation of the moment, the
city in which the presentation was being made, the perfor
mance situation (location, sponsor, motive), the size and
composition of the audience. We are not justified in speak
ing in unitary terms of Herodotus' audience as «Greeks» or
« Athenians », without a clear conception of the variety, tem
poral, spatial, social, and intellectual, within those grand ca
tegories6.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
784 P. A. STADTER
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 785
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
786 P. A. STADTER
" After 438, the Cariati district was merged into the Ionian. The major
islands, Lesbos, Chios, and Samos, did not fit into the normal tribute system,
but Chios and Samos would no doubt have been included in the Ionian district
had they been tribute-paying: see R. Seager - C. Tuplin, The Freedom of the
Asiatic Greeks, JHS, C, 1980, 141-154 at 151.
12 The fact, date, and manner of Polycrates' submission is disputed, since
Herodotus is ambiguous; in any case his successor Syloson was directly depen
dent upon Darius. The story of Polycrates' accession and prosperity seems to
indicate his independence, as does the taunt that Mitrobates flings at Oroites
(3,120,3). But at 3,44 Polycrates considers it natural that Cambyses ask him for
troops for the Egyptian campaign, and Syloson's later attempt to take control
of the island without violence suggests that he thought the Samians would ac
cept a Persian decision on his behalf, if supported by a show of force. Polycra
tes may have exercised his tyranny as a Persian vassal. The tyrants of both
Chios and Samos were present on Darius' Scythian campaign and waited for
him at the Danube (4,138,2). See G. Shipley, A History of Samos 800-188 BC, Ox
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 787
and Samos all joined the Ionian revolt, and all were reduced
by Persia after the battle of Lade13.
On the other hand, the Cyclades before the Ionian revolt
had not been subject to Dareius (5,30,6), and Herodotus does
not suggest any threat to them from the Persians. They be
came involved in Persian affairs only when Aristagoras for
his own reasons succeeded in persuading Artaphernes, the
satrap of Sardis, to attack Naxos. In his beguiling argument,
Naxos is not the completion of a series of conquests, but a
new beginning, the stepping stone to other rich islands: Par
os, Andros, and the other Cyclades, then Euboea (5,31). Nax
os, however, successfully resisted Aristagoras' scheme
(5,34).
Naxos appears a second time as a boundary state when
in 490 Datis decided not to attempt to sail his fleet along the
north shore of the Aegean, but to cross the sea directly. His
fleet left from Samos, passed by Icaria, and made its first
landing at Naxos, where Datis destroyed the temples and
the city (6,95-96)14. The strait between Icaria and Naxos thus
is the boundary between Persian territory and the West, and
the Persian destruction of the temples on Naxos their first
reprisal against Europe for the Athenian attack on Sardis15.
The major point in Herodotus' geography of the Aegean
is Delos. The island's location in the center of the sea per
mitted it to serve symbolically as the midpoint of the Ae
gean cities, but also as a gateway or door between East and
West, Asia and Europe16. This role is emphatically marked
at 6,97-98, immediately after Datis' attack on Naxos. Al
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
788 P. A. STADTER
This was the first and last time that Delos has been shaken down
to my day. By this marvel the god signalled to men the evils which
were coming. For in the reigns of Darius son of Hystaspes and
Xerxes son of Dareius and Artaxerxes son of Xerxes, three succes
sive generations, Greece suffered more evils than in the twenty ge
nerations preceding Dareius, some coming to it from the Persians,
some from their own leaders, as they fought for mastery (άρχή).
Thus there is nothing strange in Delos moving, although before it
had been stable. In fact, there was an oracle written about it,
which runs thus: Ί will move even Delos, though it is unmoved'.
These names in the Greek language mean: Dareius: doer, Xerxes,
warlike, Artaxerxes, very warlike. Greeks would rightly call these
kings by these names in their own language (6,98)17.
17 For the transposition of the names of the Persian kings see Cook, n. 26
below.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 7 89
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
790 P. A. STADTER
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 791
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
792 P. A. STADTER
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 793
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
794 P. A. STADTER
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 795
G. Arniotti, L'Europa nella polemica tra Erodoto e la scuola ionica, CISA, XII,
1986, 49-56, Romm, Herodotus and Mythic Geography (above, η. 27).
35 Herodotus' audience would also think of Athenian expeditions outside
of Europe subsequent to the Persian wars, such as the victories at the Euryme
don, the Egyptian campaign (cf. Hdt., 3,12,4; 7,7), and the suppression of the
Samian revolt.
36 Hdt., 1,6,2, repeated at 1,27,1. The importance of phoros to the kind of
conquest which Herodotus is considering explains the apparent contradiction
on the question of who first did wrong to the Greeks. For the problem, see Ero
doto: Le Storie, D. Asheri ed., Milano 1988, I, CHI and η. 1. The reference to
Croesus' alliance with Sparta in the same passage is equally important for the
reception by Herodotus' audience, but represents a different theme: cf. n. 68.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
796 P. A. STADTER
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 797
[Artaphernes] fixed the tribute that each area should pay. They
have continued to pay district by district, according to the assess
ment of Artaphernes, from then until my time (6,42)41.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
798 P. A. STADTER
tion that the tribute paid in the mid-fifth century was exactly the same that it
was under Artaphernes contradicts our other evidence. The authors of The
Athenian Tribute List argued that the original assessment of the Delian League
was taken over by Aristides and the Athenians from the Persian assessment
(ATL 3:234 and n. 3, cf. R. Meiggs, The Athenian Empire, Oxford 1972, 61-62).
See now Η. T. Wallinga, Persian Tribute and Delian Tribute, in Le tribut dans
l'empire Perse, P. Briant - C. Herrenschmidt eds., Paris 1989, 157 - 171. Others
think Herodotus refers to tribute still paid or owed to Persia (cf. O. Murray, Ό
άρχαΐος δασμός, Historia, XV, 1966, 142-156 at 142-146). I believe that Herodo
tus is speaking of tribute in his day paid to Athens.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 799
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
800 P. A. STADTER
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 801
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
802 P. A. STADTER
50 We know nothing more about this war than Herodotus and Thucydides
tell us in these passages. The time is uncertain, perhaps ca. 474-472.
51 Naxos and Thasos: Thuc., 1,99-101. For the revolts of Boeotia and Eu
boea in 446, see Thuc., 1, 113-114. For the possible revolts of Miletus and Eryth
rae, and other disaffection in the empire after the loss in Egypt, cf. R. Meiggs,
The Athenian Empire, Oxford 1972, 112-124. Many of the forward references in
Herodotus refer to battles between Greeks, including efforts by Athens to en
force and expand its power.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 803
And in fact, apparently they had no desire to be free (ού γάρ δή, ώς
οίκασι, έβούλοντο είναι έλεύθεροι, 3,143,2).
52 Note the joke on the Samians as being πολυγράμματος (« with many let
ters», but also «written all over») in Aristophanes' Babylonians of 426 B. C.
(Plut., Per., 26,4).
53 See Immerwahr, Form and Thought (above, n. 4), 230-233, A. Masarac
chia, Studi Erodotei, Messina 1976, 9-44.
54 Herodotus uses the term Ionian both restrictively, as opposed to Aeo
lians and Dorians, and inclusively, referring to all the Greeks of Asia Minor and
the islands. The tyrants at the Danube, e.g., are called Ionians (4, 97-98, 133-134,
136-137, 140, 142), although they included men from the Hellespont and Aeolis
(4,138, cf. 4,97, the Lesbian Coes). Cf. also 9,106. J. Hart, Herodotus and Greek
History, London - Canberra - New York 1982, 181-182 is too restrictive. Masa
racchia. Studi Erodotei, 10, η. 1 (above n. 53), and D. Gillis, Collaboration with
the Persians, Wiesbaden 1979, 4 n. 6, follow Herodotus in using «Ionians» to
mean all Asiatic Greeks.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
804 P. A. STADTER
But the Ionians, after a bit of hard work, decide that free
dom isn't worth the effort. Rowing in the hot sun seems to
them slavery already, and they prefer, as they say,
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 805
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
806 P. A. STADTER
at Salamis charged them with treason (8,90). For the charge, cf. Euphemus'
words at Camarina (Thuc., 6,82,4): «[The Ionians] came against their mother ci
ty, against us, and did not dare by revolt to disturb their own world (ta oikeia),
as we when we left our city. They sought slavery for themselves and to bring it
upon us as well ».
60 Thuc., 1,115,2-117,3, Diod., 12,27-28, Plut., Per., 25-28.
61 Significantly for Herodotus' theme, the war developed from a contest
between Samos and Miletus over the land of Priene on the Asiatic mainland
(Thuc., 1,115,2, Plut., Per., 25,1). Herodotus noted that Persia had attempted to
enforce the same policy (6,42,1).
62 The Corinthians wished to dominate their own allies: cf. P. A. Stadter,
The Motives for Athens' Alliance with Corcyra (Thuc. 1,44), GRBS, XXIV, 1983,
131-136.
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 807
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
808 P. A. STADTER
66 For the Ionians as weak, cf. Hdt., 1,143, Thuc., 5,9,1; 6,77,1; 8,25,3. If
the Samian revolt did shape Herodotus' narrative, there is a corollary: the rela
tive absence of attention to Lesbos implies that the Mytilenean revolt had not
occured when Herodotus was forming the overall pattern and structure of his
Histories. Therefore much of the larger plan can be dated to the period 439-428
B.C. On the willingness of cities to stay in a subordinate position, «enslaved»,
because of the financial advantages, see Thuc., 1,8: «From desire for gain, the
weaker put up with slavery to the stronger, and the stronger, using their sur
plus wealth, made subjects of the weaker cities». Thucydides applies this state
ment particularly to the thalassocracy of Minos, but it fits the contemporary si
tuation as well.
67 To this extent I support the arguments of recent scholars such as Stra
sburger, Fornara, and Raaflaub who have argued that Herodotus is not pro
Athenian (cf. n. 7).
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERODOTUS AND THE ATHENIAN ARCHE 809
cent history, the Persians had been wrong. In his own day,
his audience might rightly think of the Athenians. At the
same time there are many indications that Herodotus expec
ted his audience to see other analogies as well, for example,
that between the Persians and the Spartans. To explore
those analogies would be, as Herodotus might say, another
story68.
Examination of these themes also reaffirms two facts
essential to understanding Herodotus and the effect his sto
ries had on his audience. The first is that Herodotus' Histo
ries were not accounts of a past distant and dead, but the
earlier episodes in a history which was still continuing, and
whose contemporary events clarified and gave meaning to
the past, as the past gave meaning to the present. The sec
ond is that Herodotus' stories are not simple, in either the
telling or the hearing: they are complex and multivalent,
suggesting different insights and interpretations to different
people and in different circumstances. They were ideally
suited for conveying the richness of the human historical ex
perience to an audience both unified in its fundamental ex
perience of living in fifth century Greece and diverse in
wealth, political views, civic involvement, and personal and
national history.
Philip A. Stadter
68 Note what Herodotus reports, e.g., about the Spartans: they allied
themselves with Croesus (1,6,2); they subdued the Greeks of the Peloponnese in
the sixth century (1,68,6); their preemptive strike against Athens because «they
feared that the Athenians would grow in power» (Thuc., 1,88,1, cf. 1,23,6 an
118,2) is similar to Croesus' decision to make a preemptive strike against th
Persians «before they became great» (1,46,1); they, like Croesus, were encou
aged by the Delphic oracle (Thuc., 1,118,3: the parallel suggests that oracles r
quired care in interpretation, especially by an aggressor); the Spartans, th
champions of Greek freedom in 432, had once attempted to restore Hippias a
tyrant of Athens (5,91-93).
This content downloaded from 181.47.138.85 on Tue, 24 Oct 2017 01:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms