Ancient History & Civilisation

Herodotus, Histories, Book 7: 5–10, 34–35, 38–39, 45–52, 101–105

Introduction, Commentary Notes and Vocabulary by Claire Webster

AS: Book 7: 5–10

A Level: Book 7: 34–35, 38–39, 45–52, 101–105

Introduction

The author and his work

Information about the life of Herodotus is scant. He himself tells us that he came from Halicarnassus (now Bodrum in Turkey), a Greek colony on the southwest coast of Asia Minor under the rule of the Persian empire. Ancient sources add that he came from a leading family and was related to an epic poet called Panyassis. The tradition stated that he was driven into exile for opposing a tyrant of Halicarnassus called Lygdamis, and opposition to tyranny certainly marks his work throughout. There are no precise dates for his life, but deducing from his writing we can guess that he was born some time in the 480s BC and lived into the 420s, since he refers to events in the Peloponnesian War, which began in 431. He travelled widely, apparently as far as Elephantine in Egypt, and certainly spent some time in Athens before becoming a citizen of the city of Thurii in Magna Graecia.

In the introduction (known as a ‘proem’) to his great work, Herodotus writes:

Ἡροδότου Ἁλικαρνησσέος ἱστορίης ἀπόδεξις ἥδε, ὡς μήτε τὰ γενόμενα ἐξ ἀνθρώπων τῷ χρόνῳ ἐξίτηλα γένηται, μήτε ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά, τὰ μὲν Ἕλλησι τὰ δὲ βαρβάροισι ἀποδεχθέντα, ἀκλεᾶ γένηται, τά τε ἄλλα καὶ δι᾽ ἣν αἰτίην ἐπολέμησαν ἀλλήλοισι. (Histories 1.1)

This is the setting forth of the inquiry of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, so that the things done by men might not fade away with time, and so that the great and marvellous deeds, some displayed by the Greeks, some by the barbarians, might not lose their renown, with regard to both other matters and to the reason why they went to war with each other.

The key word here is ἱστορίη: ‘inquiry’. Herodotus grew up in an environment in which the scientific appraisal of natural phenomena was flowering. The scientists and thinkers whom we know as the pre-Socratic philosophers, and whom Aristotle termed the φυσικοί, who came from Ionia and Magna Graecia (Greek colonies in what is now Turkey and parts of Italy and Sicily), were thinking about how the world works and wondering about man’s relation to it in the century before Herodotus’ birth and during his lifetime. Thinkers such as Heraclitus and Anaximander of Ephesus, Thales and Anaximenes of Miletus, and Parmenides and Zeno of Elea questioned assumptions and the evidence of the senses while speculating on such questions as what the universe is made from, whether there is one god or many gods and what form any divine being might take. It is from this milieu of fervent innovation that Herodotus’ work springs. The pre-Socratics, when they wrote (and only fragments survive), seem to have written almost exclusively in verse, and indeed verse seems to have been the natural medium for any kind of elevated writing in the early history of written Greek. Herodotus’ immediate predecessors as writers of prose were the so-called logographoi or logopoioi, whose work again only exists now in fragments. These writers compiled genealogical, ethnographic and geographical material, often casting their writings in terms of a voyage describing both the topography of the area visited, and the customs and characteristics of the people encountered. Herodotus mentions one of these, Hecataeus of Miletus, who wrote two works, one a geographical treatise, the Περίοδος γῆς (‘Journey round the Earth’), and the other a book of mythical geneaologies. Works such as these, and other technical treatises, were quite different from an undertaking with the scope of Herodotus’ Histories, and it is right to regard Herodotus as a radical and innovative writer. John Herington says that ‘Herodotus’ Histories … stands at the frontier where two eras meet: the era in which poetry and legend were the prime media for the interpretation of our world, and the era of prose, of history, of rational enquiry generally’.

In the proem, Herodotus states that he is concerned to record both τὰ γενόμενα and ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά. We can presume that the latter means heroic deeds in war, as Herodotus’ aim is that they might not become ἀκλεᾶ: this word, with its echo of the Homeric concept of kleos, places us in the context of epic heroism and the memorializing of the deeds of the heroes in song. There is a real sense in which Herodotus is seeking to emulate the author of the Iliad and the Odyssey in prose: in seeking to explain the causes of a war between Greek and barbarian, as Homer had the Trojan War, and in relating the exploits of the participants in that war. τὰ γενόμενα, then, can be taken to mean achievements of other kinds, including technical and architectural feats. These, coupled with the final stated intention of ascertaining why the Greeks and the barbarians came to war with one another, give us the blueprint for the extraordinary work that follows, combining as it does geographical, ethnographical and religious detail with political and military accounts and technical descriptions of a varied nature.

The work as we possess it is divided into nine books, not a division made by Herodotus himself, but by later editors. The first three books deal with the rise of the Persian empire, as Herodotus explores the circumstances that led to conflict between Persia and Greece; the second three cover the reign of Darius and his unsuccessful attempt to conquer Greece in 490, as well as the revolt of the Ionian Greeks (those Greeks living in colonies on the coast of Asia Minor) against Persian power; and the final three tell the story of Darius’ son Xerxes’ unsuccessful invasion of Greece in 480. Herodotus fills this bald-sounding outline, however, with myriad details of all sorts: nothing that might interest the reader is omitted, whether it be the treatment of crocodiles in Egypt or the sort of stories that make Herodotus such rich pickings for beginners’ Greek books (‘Arion and the Dolphin’, ‘Polycrates and the Ring’, ‘How Egyptians avoided Gnats’). He describes phenomena that will make the reader gasp – Xerxes’ army was so big that it drank the rivers dry – and gives such detailed instructions for how to construct a bridge across the Hellespont or how the Scythians scalp their enemies that we could follow them ourselves should we so wish.

As has been stated, Herodotus’ writing reveals him to be broadly pro-democracy, at least as it was practised in Athens, although he allows Megabyzus in the constitutional debate in Book 3 to point out the weaknesses of ‘mob rule’:

ὁμίλου γὰρ ἀχρηίου οὐδέν ἐστι ἀξυνετώτερον οὐδὲ ὑβριστότερον

Nothing is more foolish and violent than a useless mob.

On the other hand, as might be expected of someone with his background, he is a persistent critic of tyranny and records the cruelty of despots on both sides of the Greek/Persian divide. In Book 7, this means the apparently capricious punishments inflicted by Xerxes on those who displease him, notably the story of Pythius who asks that one of his sons might be left behind to care for him in his old age. Xerxes becomes enraged at the request and has Pythius’ son cut in half, forcing the army to march between his remains.

Herodotus’ religious beliefs inform his world view consistently and form a constant thread of motivation and explanation running through the narrative. Certain things are just taken for granted: the terrible crimes of the great will be suitably punished; hubris (excessive pride, especially involving defiance of the gods) will be followed by nemesis (retributive justice). So when Xerxes has dared to flog and throw chains into the Hellespont, which is in Greek terms a god, it is only right and to be expected that he should be punished by the failure of his enterprise. Nemesis may, terrifyingly, be delayed by generations, as it is for Croesus, who is told by the oracle that his defeat and the fall of Sardis are punishment for the long-distant murder of Candaules by Gyges. The gods are jealous and will resent any mortal’s extraordinary prosperity: this is the basis of the story of the ‘unfriending’ of Polycrates, tyrant of Samos, by Amasis of Egypt, although there are other more rational explanations for the severing of their alliance. Finally, man, and even god, is always at the mercy of Fate, which can sometimes be delayed but never completely avoided: Apollo explains to Croesus that he would have liked to save Sardis because of all the offerings Croesus has made to him, and indeed he has delayed the destruction of the city as long as he can, but in the end even he cannot override the diktats of Fate. In all this, we can see Herodotus’ work again as growing from the epic tradition, as we remember episodes such as the death of Sarpedon in Iliad 16, when Zeus wishes that he could save his mortal son and has to be reminded by Hera that he may on no account do such a thing.

Portents, dreams and oracles feature strongly in Herodotus’ narrative as divine signs that reveal the truth and should never be dismissed or taken lightly. He explicitly states when discussing the apparently accurate oracle of Bacis before the battle of Salamis, ‘As I view such occurrences and consider the clear statement of Bacis, I neither venture myself to say anything to contradict oracles, nor do I allow others to do so.’ In Book 7 he relates that as the army finished crossing the Hellespont, a mare gave birth to a hare and comments that Xerxes ‘took no account of it, although it was easy to interpret’, the meaning being that Xerxes would cross into Greece proudly, but later come fleeing back, running for his life.

Dreams for Herodotus are not simply images or stories conjured by the mind of the sleeper, but physical manifestations sent by the gods, and a story in Book 7 shows the central role which he believes they take in explaining people’s actions. In this episode, Xerxes has held a debate with the Persian nobles and decided to launch the invasion of Greece. Later on in the evening, privately, he changes his mind, but then sees a dream in which a man appears to him and advises him to stick to the original plan. Deciding to ignore the dream, he recalls the assembly and tells them the expedition is off, but the following night the man appears again and tells him that if he doesn’t launch the expedition, he will fall from power. Xerxes, in a panic, summons his uncle Artabanus, who had advised against the invasion, and induces him very much against his will to dress up in the king’s clothes and sleep in his bed to see whether the dream will appear to him too. Artabanus proffers rational explanations and excuses, but Xerxes makes him go through with the plan. He sees the dream, which threatens to burn his eyes with hot irons for his attempt to divert what is inevitable. Artabanus, forced to admit that the expedition seems to be divine will, withdraws his opposition.

Discussing this story, GEM de Ste Croix in his seminal article on Herodotus says ‘if I had to recommend one single passage to illustrate Herodotus’ religious outlook it would be this’. As de Ste Croix points out, the supernatural intervention provides the final link in the chain of causation for the invasion: all the human motives have been set out in the preceding chapters, and now the dream performs its function in preventing Xerxes from changing his mind.

Herodotus had a mixed reputation in antiquity: famously, Cicero combined calling him the ‘father of history’ (pater historiae) with a remark that in his work there were ‘countless tall tales’ (innumerabiles fabulae). Plutarch wrote a work entitled de malignitate Herodoti (On the malice of Herodotus), in which he complained that Herodotus showed excessive sympathy for barbarians, unfair favouritism towards Athens, gross unfairness towards other Greek cities such as Corinth and a general lack of truthfulness. The titles of other lost works, On Herodotus’ thefts, On Herodotus’ lies and Against Herodotus, all show that there was a significant group of critics who found Herodotus’ work deeply problematic. In later times, too, he has suffered, mostly by comparison with his successor Thucydides. Those who have promoted Thucydides over Herodotus have tended to concentrate on what is seen as Herodotus’ less scientific or rigorous historical method. Whereas Herodotus chose to conduct research into the events of the past, Thucydides rejected such investigation as impossible, with a probable rebuke of Herodotus implied (τὰ γὰρ πρὸ αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ ἔτι παλαίτερα σαφῶς μὲν εὑρεῖν διὰ χρόνου πλῆθος ἀδύνατα ἦν: ‘the character of the events which preceded, whether immediately or in more remote antiquity, owing to the lapse of time, cannot be made out with certainty’). He chose instead to concentrate on writing about contemporary events, an approach followed by later ancient historians, who either wrote about the present, as Thucydides had done, or reinterpreted the works of earlier writers without conducting any new research. Herodotus tells us that he has written down what people told him, τά λεγόμενα, without deciding for the reader which he thinks is the ‘correct’ version. By contrast, Thucydides decides for us which account he finds preferable and excises the other versions. While this may make Herodotus seem undiscerning, it can be an informative and useful approach, since it records the prejudices and rumours of the time, and thus has a historical function beyond the establishment of the ‘facts’. By researching and presenting all the available versions of a story without judgement, Herodotus allows us as readers to decide for ourselves which is the most credible, possibly in the light of later events or information to which Herodotus did not have access. As a result, he might in fact be regarded as more scientific than his successor, who has suppressed information that might in the end have had a decisive bearing on our interpretation.

Crucial for our understanding of Herodotus’ historical method are the four words he uses himself to describe how he composed his work. They are ὄψις (‘sight’), γνώμη (‘judgement’), ἱστορίη (‘inquiry’) and ἀκοή (‘hearsay’). To elaborate, these tell us that as far as possible Herodotus went and saw for himself the sites of the events he is writing about (ὄψις); he used his own judgement to evaluate what he saw and heard (γνώμη); he conducted his own research by talking to people and finding out as much as it was possible to ascertain (ἱστορίη); and finally, when all those methods were exhausted, he had to rely on other people’s stories (ἀκοή).

Aristotle called Herodotus ὁ μυθολόγος, ‘the romancer’, and we can presume that Thucydides is getting in another dig at his predecessor when he rejects τὸ μυθῶδες, the storytelling or legendary element, in his work. So the patronizing judgement of later generations has tended to be that Herodotus, while making a laudable attempt at starting up the practice of history, was really not all that good: not concerned enough with accuracy, too ready to believe what people told him, too credulous of supernatural interventions, not single-minded enough, too ready to go off on digressions. This is, I think, to miss the point in more than one important way.

To begin with his ancient admirers: Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote ‘If we take up his book, we are filled with admiration till the last syllable and always seek for more’, praising his fellow-townsman for choosing a better subject, writing a better beginning and end, including more interesting material and arranging it better, and writing more vivid and graceful prose than Thucydides. The readability of Herodotus is undeniable: the sheer variety of his subject matter and the enthusiasm of his treatment of it make sure that this is the case. We also make a mistake in comparing Herodotus with Thucydides without acknowledging that his background and aims are very different. Herodotus should be seen as growing out of a poetic tradition. He actually mentions a large number of poets by name in his work (Homer, Hesiod, Archilochus, Anacreon, Sappho, Alcaeus, Simonides, Pindar, Aeschylus), as against a single prose writer, Hecataeus. He has a poet’s overview of the way in which the individual fits into the wider scheme of human life. In his world, it is from poetry that authority comes: the poetic utterances of the oracles, particularly the Delphic oracle, so often quoted by Herodotus, were taken as judgements in disputes between cities (as reported in Thucydides 1.28). The tragedies of the Athenian playwrights also exert clear influence over his writing: he mentions Phrynichus and Aeschylus, and a reading of Book 7 reveals that he must surely have been familiar with the latter’s Persians. On a wider scale, the preoccupations of tragedy – curses, dreams, oracles, hubris, nemesis – also inform his view of the events he describes. This is most clearly the case in the story of Croesus and the fall of Sardis, and the tale of Adrastus and his son Atys, which might almost be a prose retelling of an actual play, so closely does it follow the form and conventions of the genre.

If Thucydides’ aim is, as he states, to record the greatest war that has ever happened or will ever happen, in order that man might learn from it not to make the same mistakes again, Herodotus has a less immediately functional approach to his work. By looking at the events of the past, and contemplating the characters of the protagonists, Herodotus takes a long view of the lessons of history. He is not teaching us to avoid the same mistakes as our ancestors: history itself proves that this is impossible. But he enables us better to understand our state as humans and the conditions of our happiness. On numerous occasions throughout the work, characters meditate upon or come to an understanding of this: Croesus on the funeral pyre in Histories 1.86 realizes the truth of the words spoken to him years before by Solon, and in turn causes Cyrus to reflect on the mutability of human fortune. In 7.46, Xerxes bursts into tears when reviewing his vast forces and explains the reason for his outburst to his uncle Artabanus:

ἐσῆλθε γάρ με λογισάμενον κατοικτεῖραι ὡς βραχὺς εἴη ὁ πᾶς ἀνθρώπινος βίος, εἰ τούτων γε ἐόντων τοσούτων οὐδεὶς ἐς ἑκατοστὸν ἔτος περιέσται

For when I thought about it pity struck me for the brevity of the whole life of man, since of these men who number so many, no-one will survive a hundred years from now.

When it comes to the third stated aim of the proem, to record why the Greeks and the barbarians, which is to say the Persians, came to war with each other, we can learn much from the debate about whether or not to launch the invasion which Herodotus puts in Book 7. As Immerwahr, quoted by Grethlein, says of this scene: ‘Its real importance lies not in the discussion of the advisability of the Greek campaign, but in the description of Xerxes’ motives and the summary of Persian historical ambitions in general. In a sense, then, the scene gives a complete description of the causes of the Persian Wars.’ By having Xerxes stress the obligation he feels to live up to the achievements of his ancestors, as well as cite the more immediate casus belli (an act or situation that provokes or justifies a war) of the burning of Sardis and the defeat at Marathon, Herodotus makes both the long- and short-term causes clear. The tenor of the whole work, too, sets up an unbridgeable divide between the Greek and Persian worlds and outlooks, although Herodotus has some admiration for the Persians. While he does not hesitate to point out the unpredictable despotic behaviour of Xerxes, he also tells stories that illustrate his humanity and kindness (e.g. when he sends Artabanus away with full honours to administer affairs in Susa 7.52). On the one hand, the portrayal of his mercurial character seems at times typical of what we expect of the stereotypical capricious and whimsical despot, but Herodotus’ portrait of Xerxes is rather more rounded than that. He is fickle and headstrong, but he is capable of listening to his advisers, and of genuine deep feeling. While acknowledging the problems that one-man rule brings, Herodotus admires the strength that a unified command gives to the Persians, as well as the apparently unswerving loyalty of the king’s staff. He makes it clear, however, that fear of the monarch hampers real discussion: in his account of the debate mentioned above, he tells us that only Artabanus is bold enough, because of his age and status as Xerxes’ uncle, to disagree with him. All the other nobles, although ostensibly summoned to give their advice, do not dare do so. The clearest statement of the ideological gulf between the two sides comes in the speech of the exiled Spartan king Demaratus in Book 7. The total inability of Xerxes to understand why men might be prepared to sacrifice their lives for a belief or ideal without the need for compulsion speaks volumes.

The prescribed text: an overview

Book 7 begins with an explanation of Xerxes’ accession to the throne: his father, Darius, enraged by the defeat at Marathon and vowing to avenge the Persians, planned an expedition against Greece and sent messengers across his empire requisitioning troops and supplies from various cities throughout Asia. So vast was the undertaking, since the demands made were even greater than for the Marathon campaign, that, Herodotus tells us, it took three whole years. Further, in the fourth year, the Egyptians, who had been subdued by Darius’ predecessor Cambyses, staged a rebellion.

Herodotus explains that it was the Persian custom for a king setting out on an expedition to appoint his successor prior to departure, presumably to ensure a swift and easy continuance of his line should he fail to return. In Darius’ case, the succession was not clear-cut – he had had three sons by his first wife, and a further four by his second wife, Atossa, after he had succeeded to the kingship. So the eldest of his sons, Artobazanes, claimed the throne on the grounds of absolute seniority, while the eldest of the sons born to Darius and Atossa, Xerxes, staked his claim on the fact that Atossa was the daughter of Cyrus the Great. The deciding argument is presented here as being provided by Demaratus, the deposed king of Sparta, in self-imposed exile in Persia. He introduces the Spartan concept of porphyrogeniture, which is to say that a son born to a ruling king outranks any born before he ascended the throne, the very system which had led to Demaratus’ own overthrow. The intervention by Demaratus introduces something of a theme of the book, showing the Persian king taking advice from wise counsellors, and indeed Demaratus himself appears again many chapters (and many years) later, lauding Spartan bravery and obedience to the laws in conversation with Xerxes.

One year into the Egyptian rebellion, Darius died and the kingdom passed to Xerxes. Herodotus tells us that Xerxes had no great enthusiasm for a campaign against Greece, but came under the sway of his cousin Mardonius, who, we are told, wielded ‘a greater influence over him than any other Persian’. Mardonius has appeared in Book 6 of the Histories in command of a Persian force sent to punish the Athenians in the aftermath of the Ionian revolt of 492. He was last mentioned when Darius relieved him of his command after the catastrophic destruction of the fleet rounding the coast near Mount Athos, which Herodotus tells us saw the loss of 300 ships and some 2,000 men. His reappearance here marks his return to favour under the new regime and he is pivotal in persuading Xerxes to launch the expedition. The campaign of 480 saw some considerable success for Mardonius; he was made governor of the conquered parts of Greece and sacked the city of Athens. When the Athenians rejected his offer of a truce, Mardonius led the Persians to meet them at Plataea and was killed in the ensuing battle, the final act in the 480 invasion.

Mardonius is shown as a persistent and persuasive character: he urges Xerxes to stage the campaign not only to punish the Athenians but also to win renown for himself and warn other states not to consider attacking his territory. He adds compelling detail about the beauty and fertility of Europe and combines this with flattery: ‘What mortal save the King deserves to have it as his own?’ Herodotus’ opinion is that Mardonius is motivated by his own daredevil character and his ambition to be made governor of Greece: an ambition which, as mentioned above, is satisfied, if only in the short term.

The Egyptian rebellion is duly crushed, and the preparations for the expedition against Athens are under way when Herodotus describes a meeting called by Xerxes of ‘the foremost noblemen in Persia’ so that he can keep them informed of his plans and garner their opinions. Herodotus presents this meeting in terms of a formal debate with set-piece speeches from the participants. Xerxes speaks first, laying out his intentions to bridge the Hellespont, take revenge upon the Athenians and, in the process, conquer what amounts to the whole world.

Mardonius’ speech follows, supporting Xerxes’ plans, and moreover presenting the Greeks as negligible in battle.

At this point, Herodotus says that all the other Persians lacked the courage to voice an opinion against the proposal. Only Xerxes’ uncle, Artabanus, dared to speak, emboldened by his age and close family relationship to the king.

Artabanus is presented throughout the prescribed text as an extremely cautious elder statesman, learned through experience, and steeped in proverbial wisdom. He provides a contrast to both the reckless and ambitious Mardonius and at times vacillating and uncertain Xerxes. His speech here recalls the defeats and disasters suffered by previous campaigns (which have been brushed over by Mardonius), points out that he had cautioned Darius against the expedition which ended in failure, and advises Xerxes not to run unnecessary risks.

Herodotus presents Xerxes as prey to external influences both human and divine, as well as to his own mutable character: Mardonius sways him in favour of the expedition, and he treats Artabanus’ caution with rage, but when left alone as darkness falls, he falls victim to uncertainty and changes his mind. In his sleep he sees a dream vision advising him to stick to his decided course of action, but dismisses it and summons the Persians the next day to tell them that he has decided against the campaign after all. There follows a dramatic series of events included by Herodotus to show the part played by the divine in human affairs: the dream appears again, and throws Xerxes into such a panic that he summons Artabanus and requires him to dress up in the king’s clothes in the hope that he will see the dream as well. Initially very reluctant, Artabanus is eventually persuaded to comply with Xerxes’ plan, apparently believing that the dream will not be foolish enough to fall for the deception. He is duly terrified when the dream does appear, and rebukes him for his part in changing Xerxes’ mind, and he rushes to advise the king to resume preparations, since it is clearly divine will that the expedition be launched. This view is apparently then further supported by another vision in which Xerxes sees himself with his head crowned with olive, the shoots of which envelop the earth. The Magi interpret this to mean that the whole earth, and all its people, will become Xerxes’ slaves.

Herodotus spends the next part of the book describing some of the preparations for the campaign, emphasizing that this was the greatest army ever mustered, taking four years to amass, and drinking all but the greatest rivers dry as it passed. We are told that Xerxes had a canal dug across the Athos peninsula, in an attempt to avert any possible repeat of the naval losses suffered by Darius. Herodotus’ opinion is that the king was partially motivated in this undertaking by the desire to reinforce his own magnificence, since it would have been possible to haul the ships over the isthmus rather than digging this canal, which he tells us was wide enough for two triremes to pass one another rowing.

As Xerxes passes through the city of Celaenae, he meets a hugely wealthy individual called Pythius, who not only treats the army with lavish hospitality, but offers the whole of his movable fortune to the war effort. Xerxes is shown by Herodotus to be amazed by Pythius’ great wealth and genuinely moved by his generosity, granting him a formal title of friendship and magnanimously making a present to him of the fortune he offered, with extra money added.

The two episodes which follow appear to highlight the terrifyingly capricious nature of Xerxes’ character. First, the pontoon bridge which has been built across the Hellespont is destroyed by a storm, throwing Xerxes into a passionate rage. Not only does he order the sea whipped and abused, he has the engineers responsible for building the bridges beheaded. Then, as the army sets off from Sardis after wintering there, the same Pythius who a few chapters earlier was treated with such generosity and open-heartedness by Xerxes presumes upon his official friendship with the king by begging him to allow the eldest of his four sons to stay behind to look after him in his old age. Xerxes is grossly offended and in retribution has Pythius’ son hacked into two pieces which are placed on opposite sides of the road for the army to march between.

The army proceeds on its march, drinking the River Scamander dry and pausing at Priam’s citadel, where Xerxes makes a sacrifice to Athena of Ilium and the Magi offer libations to the heroes. Herodotus tells us that the night after these rituals, a great terror seized the army. He offers no explanation, but perhaps we are supposed to think that the terror is a warning from the gods not to proceed. It certainly adds a feeling of doubt and uncertainty to the account.

Reaching Abydos, Xerxes holds a review of the forces at his disposal from a specially-built white stone dais. He is moved to tears and, when questioned by Artabanus, explains that he is musing on the fleeting nature of human life. Artabanus responds with a reminder that there are worse sufferings than the brevity of life – indeed, life is often so terrible that death comes as a release. In this moment of quiet reflection, Xerxes asks Artabanus whether, had it not been for the dream, he would have changed his mind about the expedition, and Artabanus confesses that he is full of anxiety about the outcome. He cryptically says that he regards ‘the two greatest things in existence’ as Xerxes’ bitterest enemies. Xerxes is presented as taking things rather literally, and presumes that his uncle is talking about his army and fleet. Artabanus explains that his real meaning was that the sea and the land were Xerxes’ enemies, because the fleet is so huge that no harbour exists large enough to hold it, while the army will starve because the land will be unable to support it.

Continuing the representation of him in this episode as reasonable and reflective, Herodotus shows Xerxes responding in measured tones, advising Artabanus to lay aside his overcautious and anxious approach. Xerxes observes that the Persian empire would not have reached its present extent had his predecessors not taken risks. He tells Artabanus that the campaign will be brought to such a swift and successful conclusion that the army won’t have time to starve.

In his final intervention, Artabanus offers Xerxes one last piece of advice, which is that he should not lead the Ionian Greeks in war against their mother city of Athens. They are, he says, unnecessary to the success of the campaign; it is criminal to expect them to enslave their mother city; and the strong likelihood is that they will in fact go over to the other side and attempt to secure Athens’ liberty. The calm and self-confident Xerxes of this exchange remains unmoved. He reassures Artabanus that the worth of the Ionians is not only unimpeachable but also reinforced by the fact that they have left their wives and children behind in Persian territory. The exchange concludes with Artabanus being sent back to Susa to keep Xerxes’ rule safe in his absence.

Once Artabanus has gone, Xerxes summons the most eminent Persians to make a preliminary sacrifice, and then the great crossing of the Hellespont begins.

There follows an extensive and lavish description by Herodotus of the different contingents of the army and the various accoutrements and clothing by which they are distinguished one from another, followed by a catalogue of the fleet. Covering some 39 chapters, this excursus emphasizes the size and diversity of the forces amassed, and the detailed descriptions enhance the exoticism and glamour of the account.

Once the crossing has been completed, Xerxes conducts a review of the whole army and fleet, riding in a chariot between the ranks and sailing between the prows of the ships. This complete, he sends for Demaratus, the same Spartan exile whom we encountered right at the start of the book offering advice on the succession. In self-confident mood, buoyed by the sight of his vast array of armed forces, Xerxes asks Demaratus whether, speaking as a Greek, he really thinks that the Greeks will be able to withstand the Persian onslaught, and encourages him to speak the truth.

Demaratus, confining his answer to the Lacedaemonians, asserts that, even if the whole of the rest of Greece were to join forces with the Persians, the Lacedaemonians would never relent or consent to be enslaved. Xerxes greets Demaratus’ claims with incredulity: surely his claim that a thousand Lacedaemonians would be prepared to stand against his combined forces is laughable? The idea that they would make such a stand, especially without a single, fearsome leader set over them, or someone whipping them into battle, is unthinkable.

Demaratus acknowledges his debt to the Persians, Darius in particular, who took him in following his exile from Sparta. He nonetheless renews his claim that the Spartans are inferior to none, subject as they are to the law of their land, which forbids them to turn tail in battle. Xerxes takes the whole matter light-heartedly and sends Demaratus away affectionately.

The speeches

Thucydides famously says of the speeches in his history:

χαλεπὸν τὴν ἀκρίβειαν αὐτὴν τῶν λεχθέντων διαμνημονεῦσαι ἦν ἐμοί τε ὧν αὐτὸς ἤκουσα καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοθέν ποθεν ἐμοὶ ἀπαγγέλλουσιν: ὡς δ᾽ ἂν ἐδόκουν ἐμοὶ ἕκαστοι περὶ τῶν αἰεὶ παρόντων τὰ δέοντα μάλιστ᾽ εἰπεῖν, ἐχομένῳ ὅτι ἐγγύτατα τῆς ξυμπάσης γνώμης τῶν ἀληθῶς λεχθέντων, οὕτως εἴρηται

I have found it difficult to retain a memory of the precise words which I had heard spoken; and so it was with those who brought me reports. But I have made the persons say what it seemed to me most opportune for them to say in view of each situation; at the same time, I have adhered as closely as possible to the general sense of what was actually said. (1.22)

In other words, Thucydides admits here that he had to make up the speeches, even those he heard himself, because he couldn’t remember them properly, or didn’t know what had been said. But he has put into the mouths of his protagonists words that we might assume to be the sort of thing someone would say in that situation.

Herodotus makes no comment about his speeches, although clearly they too must be ‘made up’, since how, for example, could anyone possibly know what Xerxes and Artabanus said to one another in private? Herodotus’ speeches are mostly different from Thucydides’ in being conversational rather than rhetorical and natural-sounding utterances rather than set pieces. To quote Jebb, ‘… the author seldom speaks when there is a fair pretext for making the characters speak’: frequent and natural use of direct speech enlivens the narrative, an important consideration when one remembers that the first audience of the Histories would have been listening to the work read, not reading it themselves. Herodotus’ growth out of the epic tradition and familiarity with tragedy make it natural for him to fill his work with the words of the actors who take part in it. It is no surprise that he does not feel the need to excuse or explain his practice, since it is for him the natural way to proceed.

Exceptions to the non-rhetorical rule include the debate on constitutions in Book 3 and the deliberations before the launch of the expedition in Book 7: in both of these cases, the speeches are more carefully honed and elaborated. Such speeches mark crucial turning points in the narrative, as well as dramatizing real-life dilemmas and revealing the characters of the speakers. We inevitably also suspect that Herodotus uses his speeches as one way of transmitting his own views and must admit at times that the words he places into the mouths of his speakers, particularly the prescient advice of Artabanus in the debate in Book 7, owe too much to hindsight or encapsulate ideas that are ‘too Greek’ to issue from the mouth of a fifth-century Persian.

The Graeco-Persian Wars

The origins of the conflict between Greece and Persia can be traced to Cyrus’ conquest of the Greek cities of Ionia in 547 and the appointment of tyrants (local rulers answerable to the Great King) to rule over them. At the instigation of Aristagoras, tyrant of Miletus, the Ionian Greeks revolted against Persian rule in 499 and were not finally defeated until the battle of Lade in 494, by which time Athens and Eretria had joined forces with the colonists and helped them capture and burn the Persian regional capital of Sardis. This caused the Persian king Darius to swear vengeance upon the Athenians and Eretrians: Herodotus reports that he required a slave to say ‘remember Athens’ to him as he served him each meal.

The first Persian invasion of Greece was led by Mardonius in 492: he re-subjugated Thrace and conquered Macedon, but although he says in the speech in Book 7 that his expedition proved Persian superiority, Herodotus’ account makes clear that the storm which struck the ships as they rounded Mount Athos was truly disastrous.

The second of Darius’ attempts, under the command of Datis and Artaphrenes, took place in 490 and again enjoyed some success before decisive defeat at the Battle of Marathon, a humiliation cited by Xerxes in Book 7 as one of the reasons to go to war again.

The death of Darius in 486 meant that responsibility for continuing the campaign fell to his son Xerxes, and the preparations for his expedition in 480 form the focus of this set text. The victory at the narrow pass of Thermopylae, when the entire Persian army was held up by a force of 300 Spartans, who, Herodotus tells us, only suffered defeat because of treachery, allowed the Persians to reach and burn Athens. Decisive naval victory for the Greeks at the battle of Salamis, however, followed by victory for the combined Greek land forces at Plataea once again put an end to Persian hopes of conquest in Greece.

It is worth pointing out that although the victory over the Persians attained iconic status in Greece, the defeat suffered by Xerxes was most likely not viewed as so significant in Persia. Certainly it did not bring Xerxes’ reign to an end: he continued to rule Persia for another fifteen years, continuing with ambitious building projects begun by Darius at Susa and Persepolis. He was ultimately assassinated in a palace intrigue by the commander of the royal bodyguard.

Herodotus’ language

A brief glance at a page of the text will be sufficient to show that the language of Herodotus is distinct from the Greek written in Classical Athens with which we are most familiar. Herodotus, coming from Halicarnassus, wrote Ionic Greek, although the forms of words in the manuscripts that we have of the Histories differ widely between and even within the different copies. Clearly many corrections and alterations have been added by copyists, either changing original forms to Attic or restoring or inventing Ionic forms. In the case of the latter, we don’t have enough original Ionic to check the veracity of the suggested emendations. For a very short and usable discussion of Herodotean dialect, refer to pages 228–9 of the Oxford Grammar of Classical Greek by James Morwood. For those interested in pursuing the topic at greater depth, A.M. Bowie’s introduction to Herodotus Histories Book VIII in Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics, 2007 is excellent, and Stein’s Summary of the Dialect of Herodotus (Heinrich Stein, 1880) is exhaustive and very easily accessible for free via the internet.

The list below gives some of the main features that you will notice and should look out for. Many of these examples are taken from the set text prescription.

ἀμ before β and π instead of ἀνα

κ for π in all adjectives and adverbs formed on the stem πο: κοῖος, ὁκοῖος, κόσος, κότερος, κότε, κόυ for ποῖος, etc.

κ for χ: δέκομαι for δέχομαι, οὐκί for οὐχί

Shifting or lack of aspiration: ἐνθαῦτα for ἐνταῦθα, ἐνθεῦτεν for ἐντεῦθεν, ἀπιγμένοι for ἀφιγμένοι

Shortening: γίνομαι for γίγνομαι, γινώσκω for γιγνώσκω

η for α: προθυμίη, θεήσομαι, ναυηγός, νεηνίης, νηός, θώρηξ, φλυηρέειν, τριήκοντα, στρατηίη, ἀδελφεῆς

ε for ει: κρέσσων, μέζων, πλέων, δέξαι, ἐδέχθην, and in the feminines of adjectives such as θῆλυς θήλεα and ταχύς ταχέα

Lack of contraction: νόος for νοῦς, γένεος for γένους, πλήρεες for πλήρεις, ποιέειν for ποεῖν, ἐποιέετο for ἐποιεῖτο, πολεμέειν for πολεμεῖν, στρατηλάτεε for στρατηλατεῖ

Genitive singular masculine ending is -εω instead of -ου: Ξέρξεω for Ξέρξου

Genitive plural ending is -εων instead of -ων: μοιρέων for μοιρῶν

Dative plural endings are -ηισι instead of -αις and -οισι instead of -οις: ἡμέρηισι for ἡμέραις, λόγοισι for λόγοις.

Words like πόλις keep the iota: πόλιος for πόλεως, πόλι for πόλει

ἐμέο for έμοῦ, σέο for σοῦ

ὅστις has genitive s. ὅτευ, dative s. ὅτεωι, genitive pl. ὅτεων, dative pl. ὅτεοισι

In verbs, the augment is sometimes missing: ἀμειβόμην for ἠμειβόμην

-μι verbs sometimes conjugate like contracted verbs: e.g. τιθεῖς for τίθης, τιθεῖσι for τιθέασι

In εἰμί an initial epsilon is often preserved: ἐὼν for ὤν, παρεὼν for παρῶν

-αται, -ατο for -νται, -ντο: ἀπίκαται for ἀφίκονται

Also: ὦν for οὖν, ἴθεως for εὐθύς, μιν = αὐτον, αὐτήν; σφεας often = αὐτούς; εἶπα for εἶπον, εἴπας for εἰπών

Further reading

Asheri, David et al. Introduction to A Commentary on Herodotus Books I-IV (OUP, 2007).

Gould, John. Herodotus (Bloomsbury, 2000).

Marincola, John. Greek Historians (Greece and Rome New Surveys in the Classics No. 31, CUP, 2008).

de Selincourt, Aubrey. The World of Herodotus (North Point Press, 1982).

de Ste Croix, G.E.M. Herodotus. Greece and Rome Vol 24, No 2 (October 1977).

Thomas, Rosalind. Herodotus in Context (CUP, 2002).

Usher, Stephen. The Historians of Greece and Rome (Hamilton, 1969).

Tom Holland’s 2013 translation for Penguin is vigorous and readable, with an excellent introduction and notes.

Text

Chapters 1–4: News of the defeat of the Persians at the Battle of Marathon makes King Darius eager to launch an expedition against Greece. Three years are spent raising troops, but in the fourth year the province of Egypt revolts. Darius wishes to appoint his successor before setting out on campaign, but there are rival claims to the throne from his sons Artobazanes and Xerxes. The exiled Spartan king Demaratus intervenes and decides the dispute in favour of Xerxes. One year into the Egyptian rebellion, Darius dies and Xerxes becomes king.

5
ἀποθανόντος δὲ Δαρείου ἡ βασιληίη ἀνεχώρησε ἐς τὸν παῖδα τὸν ἐκείνου Ξέρξην. ὁ τοίνυν Ξέρξης ἐπὶ μὲν τὴν Ἑλλάδα οὐδαμῶς πρόθυμος ἦν κατ᾽ ἀρχὰς στρατεύεσθαι, ἐπὶ δὲ Αἴγυπτον ἐποιέετο στρατιῆς ἄγερσιν. παρεὼν δὲ καὶ δυνάμενος παρ᾽ αὐτῷ μέγιστον Περσέων Μαρδόνιος ὁ Γωβρύεω, ὃς ἦν Ξέρξῃ μὲν ἀνεψιὸς, Δαρείου δὲ ἀδελφεῆς παῖς, τοιούτου λόγου εἴχετο, λέγων· “δέσποτα, οὐκ οἰκός ἐστι Ἀθηναίους ἐργασαμένους πολλὰ δὴ κακὰ Πέρσας μὴ οὐ δοῦναι δίκας τῶν ἐποίησαν. ἀλλ᾽ εἰ τὸ μὲν νῦν ταῦτα πρήσσοις τά περ ἐν χερσὶ ἔχεις· ἡμερώσας δὲ Αἴγυπτον τὴν ἐξυβρίσασαν στρατηλάτεε ἐπὶ τὰς Ἀθήνας, ἵνα λόγος τέ σε ἔχῃ πρὸς ἀνθρώπων ἀγαθός καί τις ὕστερον φυλάσσηται ἐπὶ γῆν τὴν σὴν στρατεύεσθαι.” οὗτος μέν οἱ ὁ λόγος ἦν τιμωρός, τούτου δὲ τοῦ λόγου παρενθήκην ποιεέσκετο τήνδε, ὡς ἡ Εὐρώπη περικαλλὴς εἴη χώρη καὶ δένδρεα παντοῖα φέρει τὰ ἥμερα ἀρετήν τε ἄκρη, βασιλέϊ τε μούνῳ θνητῶν ἀξίη ἐκτῆσθαι.		1 2 3

6
ταῦτα δὲ ἔλεγε οἷα νεωτέρων ἔργων ἐπιθυμητὴς ἐὼν καὶ θέλων αὐτὸς τῆς Ἑλλάδος ὕπαρχος εἶναι. χρόνῳ δὲ κατεργάσατό τε καὶ ἀνέπεισε Ξέρξην ὥστε ποιέειν ταῦτα· συνέλαβε γὰρ καὶ ἄλλα οἱ σύμμαχα γενόμενα ἐς τὸ πείθεσθαι Ξέρξην. τοῦτο μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς Θεσσαλίης παρὰ τῶν Ἀλευαδέων ἀπιγμένοι ἄγγελοι ἐπεκαλέοντο βασιλέα πᾶσαν προθυμίην παρεχόμενοι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα· (οἱ δὲ Ἀλευάδαι οὗτοι ἦσαν Θεσσαλίης βασιλέες), τοῦτο δὲ Πεισιστρατιδέων οἱ ἀναβεβηκότες ἐς Σοῦσα, τῶν τε αὐτῶν λόγων ἐχόμενοι τῶν καὶ οἱ Ἀλευάδαι, καὶ δή τι πρὸς τούτοισι ἔτι πλέον προσωρέγοντό οἱ. ἔχοντες <δ’> Ὀνομάκριτον, ἄνδρα Ἀθηναῖον χρησμολόγον τε καὶ διαθέτην χρησμῶν τῶν Μουσαίου, ἀναβεβήκεσαν, τὴν ἔχθρην προκαταλυσάμενοι· ἐξηλάσθη γὰρ ὑπὸ Ἱππάρχου τοῦ Πεισιστράτου ὁ Ὀνομάκριτος ἐξ Ἀθηνέων, ἐπ᾽ αὐτοφώρῳ ἁλοὺς ὑπὸ Λάσου τοῦ Ἑρμιονέος ἐμποιέων ἐς τὰ Μουσαίου χρησμόν ὡς αἱ ἐπὶ Λήμνῳ ἐπικείμεναι νῆσοι ἀφανιζοίατο κατὰ τῆς θαλάσσης. διὸ ἐξήλασέ μιν ὁ Ἵππαρχος, πρότερον χρεώμενος τὰ μάλιστα. τότε δὲ συναναβὰς ὅκως ἀπίκοιτο ἐς ὄψιν τὴν βασιλέος, λεγόντων τῶν Πεισιστρατιδέων περὶ αὐτοῦ σεμνοὺς λόγους κατέλεγε τῶν χρησμῶν· εἰ μέν τι ἐνέοι σφάλμα φέρον τῷ βαρβάρῳ, τῶν μὲν ἔλεγε οὐδέν, ὁ δὲ τὰ εὐτυχέστατα ἐκλεγόμενος ἔλεγε, τόν τε Ἑλλήσποντον ὡς ζευχθῆναι χρεὸν εἴη ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρὸς Πέρσεω, τήν τε ἔλασιν ἐξηγεόμενος. οὗτός τε δὴ χρησμῳδέων προσεφέρετο, καὶ οἵ τε Πεισιστρατίδαι καὶ οἱ Ἀλευάδαι γνώμας ἀποδεικνύμενοι.		1 2 3 4 5

7
ὡς δὲ ἀνεγνώσθη Ξέρξης στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, ἐνθαῦτα δευτέρῳ μὲν ἔτεϊ μετὰ τὸν θάνατον τὸν Δαρείου πρῶτα στρατιὴν ποιέεται ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀπεστεῶτας. τούτους μέν νυν καταστρεψάμενος καὶ Αἴγυπτον πᾶσαν πολλὸν δουλοτέρην ποιήσας ἢ ἐπὶ Δαρείου ἦν, ἐπιτρέπει Ἀχαιμένεϊ, ἀδελφεῷ μὲν ἑωυτοῦ, Δαρείου δὲ παιδί. Ἀχαιμένεα μέν νυν ἐπιτροπεύοντα Αἰγύπτου χρόνῳ μετέπειτα ἐφόνευσε Ἰνάρως ὁ Ψαμμητίχου ἀνὴρ Λίβυς.		1

8
Ξέρξης δὲ μετὰ Αἰγύπτου ἅλωσιν ὡς ἔμελλε ἐς χεῖρας ἄξεσθαι τὸ στράτευμα τὸ ἐπὶ τὰς Ἀθήνας, σύλλογον ἐπίκλητον Περσέων τῶν ἀρίστων ἐποιέετο, ἵνα γνώμας τε πύθηταί σφεων καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν πᾶσι εἴπῃ τὰ θέλει. ὡς δὲ συνελέχθησαν, ἔλεγε Ξέρξης τάδε·		1

8A
“ἄνδρες Πέρσαι, οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς κατηγήσομαι νόμον τόνδε ἐν ὑμῖν τιθείς παραδεξάμενός τε αὐτῷ χρήσομαι. ὡς γὰρ ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, οὐδαμά κω ἠτρεμίσαμεν, ἐπείτε παρελάβομεν τὴν ἡγεμονίην τήνδε παρὰ Μήδων, Κύρου κατελόντος Ἀστυάγεα· ἀλλὰ θεός τε οὕτω ἄγει καὶ αὐτοῖσι ἡμῖν πολλὰ ἐπέπουσι συμφέρεται ἐπὶ τὸ ἄμεινον. τὰ μέν νυν Κῦρός τε καὶ Καμβύσης πατήρ τε <ὁ> ἐμὸς Δαρεῖος κατεργάσαντο καὶ προσεκτήσαντο ἔθνεα, ἐπισταμένοισι εὖ οὐκ ἄν τις λέγοι. ἐγὼ δὲ ἐπείτε παρέλαβον τὸν θρόνον τοῦτον, ἐφρόντιζον ὅκως μὴ λείψομαι τῶν πρότερον γενομένων ἐν τιμῇ τῇδε μηδὲ ἐλάσσω προσκτήσομαι δύναμιν Πέρσῃσι· φροντίζων δὲ εὑρίσκω ἅμα μὲν κῦδος ἡμῖν προσγινόμενον χώρην τε τῆς νῦν ἐκτήμεθα οὐκ ἐλάσσονα οὐδὲ φλαυροτέρην παμφορωτέρην δέ, ἅμα δὲ τιμωρίην τε καὶ τίσιν γινομένην. διὸ ὑμέας νῦν ἐγὼ συνέλεξα, ἵνα τὸ νοέω πρήσσειν ὑπερθέωμαι ὑμῖν.		1 2

8B
μέλλω ζεύξας τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ἐλᾶν στρατὸν διὰ τῆς Εὐρώπης ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, ἵνα Ἀθηναίους τιμωρήσωμαι ὅσα δὴ πεποιήκασι Πέρσας τε καὶ πατέρα τὸν ἐμόν. ὡρᾶτε μέν νυν καὶ Δαρεῖον ἰθύοντα στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄνδρας τούτους. ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μὲν τετελεύτηκε καὶ οὐκ ἐξεγένετό οἱ τιμωρήσασθαι· ἐγὼ δὲ ὑπέρ τε ἐκείνου καὶ τῶν ἄλλων Περσέων οὐ πρότερον παύσομαι πρὶν ἢ ἕλω τε καὶ πυρώσω τὰς Ἀθήνας, οἵ γε ἐμὲ καὶ πατέρα τὸν ἐμὸν ὑπῆρξαν ἄδικα ποιεῦντες. πρῶτα μὲν ἐς Σάρδις ἐλθόντες ἅμα Ἀρισταγόρῃ τῷ Μιλησίῳ, δούλῳ δὲ ἡμετέρῳ, ἀπικόμενοι ἐνέπρησαν τά τε ἄλσεα καὶ τὰ ἱρά· δεύτερα δὲ ἡμέας οἷα ἔρξαν ἐς τὴν σφετέρην ἀποβάντας, ὅτε Δᾶτίς τε καὶ Ἀρταφρένης ἐστρατήγεον, τὰ ἐπίστασθέ κου πάντες.		1 2 3

8C
τούτων μέντοι εἵνεκα ἀνάρτημαι ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς στρατεύεσθαι, ἀγαθὰ δὲ ἐν αὐτοῖσι τοσάδε ἀνευρίσκω λογιζόμενος· εἰ τούτους τε καὶ τοὺς τούτοισι πλησιοχώρους καταστρεψόμεθα, οἳ Πέλοπος τοῦ Φρυγὸς νέμονται χώρην, γῆν τὴν Περσίδα ἀποδέξομεν τῷ Διὸς αἰθέρι ὁμουρέουσαν. οὐ γὰρ δὴ χώρην γε οὐδεμίαν κατόψεται ἥλιος ὅμουρέοῦσαν τῇ ἡμετέρῃ, ἀλλὰ σφεας πάσας ἐγὼ ἅμα ὑμῖν μίαν χώρην θήσω, διὰ πάσης διεξελθὼν τῆς Εὐρώπης. πυνθάνομαι γὰρ ὧδε ἔχειν, οὔτε τινὰ πόλιν ἀνδρῶν οὐδεμίαν οὔτε ἔθνος οὐδὲν ἀνθρώπων ὑπολείπεσθαι, τὸ ἡμῖν οἷόν τε ἔσται ἐλθεῖν ἐς μάχην, τούτων τῶν κατέλεξα ὑπεξαραιρημένων. οὕτω οἵ τε ἡμῖν αἴτιοι ἕξουσι δούλιον ζυγὸν οἵ τε ἀναίτιοι.		1 2 3

8D
ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ἄν μοι τάδε ποιέοντες χαρίζοισθε. ἐπεὰν ὑμῖν σημήνω τὸν χρόνον ἐς τὸν ἥκειν δεῖ, προθύμως πάντα τινὰ ὑμέων χρήσει παρεῖναι· ὃς ἂν δὲ ἔχων ἥκῃ παρεσκευασμένον στρατὸν κάλλιστα, δώσω οἱ δῶρα τὰ τιμιώτατα νομίζεται εἶναι ἐν ἡμετέρου. ποιητέα μέν νυν ταῦτα ἐστὶ οὕτω· ἵνα δὲ μὴ ἰδιοβουλέειν ὑμῖν δοκέω, τίθημι τὸ πρῆγμα ἐς μέσον, γνώμην κελεύων ὑμέων τὸν βουλόμενον ἀποφαίνεσθαι.” ταῦτα εἴπας ἐπαύετο.		1 2

9
μετ᾽ αὐτὸν δὲ Μαρδόνιος ἔλεγε· “ὦ δέσποτα, οὐ μοῦνον εἶς τῶν γενομένων Περσέων ἄριστος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἐσομένων, ὃς τά τε ἄλλα λέγων ἐπίκεο ἄριστα καὶ ἀληθέστατα καὶ Ἴωνας τοὺς ἐν τῇ Εὐρώπῃ κατοικημένους οὐκ ἐάσεις καταγελάσαι ἡμῖν ἐόντας ἀναξίους. καὶ γὰρ δεινὸν ἂν εἴη πρῆγμα, εἰ Σάκας μὲν καὶ Ἰνδοὺς καὶ Αἰθίοπάς τε καὶ Ἀσσυρίους ἄλλα τε ἔθνεα πολλὰ καὶ μεγάλα ἀδικήσαντα Πέρσας οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ δύναμιν προσκτᾶσθαι βουλόμενοι, καταστρεψάμενοι δούλους ἔχομεν, Ἕλληνας δὲ ὑπάρξαντας ἀδικίης οὐ τιμωρησόμεθα·		1 2

9A
τί δείσαντες; κοίην πλήθεος συστροφήν; κοίην δὲ χρημάτων δύναμιν; τῶν ἐπιστάμεθα μὲν τὴν μάχην, ἐπιστάμεθα δὲ τὴν δύναμιν ἐοῦσαν ἀσθενέα· ἔχομεν δὲ αὐτῶν παῖδας καταστρεψάμενοι, τούτους οἳ ἐν τῇ ἡμετέρῃ κατοικημένοι Ἴωνές τε καὶ Αἰολέες καὶ Δωριέες καλέονται. ἐπειρήθην δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ἤδη ἐπελαύνων ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄνδρας τούτους ὑπὸ πατρὸς τοῦ σοῦ κελευσθείς, καί μοι μέχρι Μακεδονίης ἐλάσαντι καὶ ὀλίγον ἀπολιπόντι ἐς αὐτὰς Ἀθήνας ἀπικέσθαι οὐδεὶς ἠντιώθη ἐς μάχην.		1 2

9B
καίτοι γε ἐώθασι Ἕλληνες, ὡς πυνθάνομαι, ἀβουλότατα πολέμους ἵστασθαι ὑπό τε ἀγνωμοσύνης καὶ σκαιότητος. ἐπεὰν γὰρ ἀλλήλοισι πόλεμον προείπωσι, ἐξευρόντες τὸ κάλλιστον χωρίον καὶ λειότατον, ἐς τοῦτο κατιόντες μάχονται, ὥστε σὺν κακῷ μεγάλῳ οἱ νικῶντες ἀπαλλάσσονται· περὶ δὲ τῶν ἑσσουμένων οὐδὲ λέγω ἀρχήν, ἐξώλεες γὰρ δὴ γίνονται. τοὺς χρῆν, ἐόντας ὁμογλώσσους, κήρυξί τε διαχρεωμένους καὶ ἀγγέλοισι καταλαμβάνειν τὰς διαφορὰς καὶ παντὶ μᾶλλον ἢ μάχῃσι· εἰ δὲ πάντως ἔδεε πολεμέειν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ἐξευρίσκειν χρῆν τῇ ἑκάτεροι εἰσὶ δυσχειρωτότατοι καὶ ταύτῃ πειρᾶν. τρόπῳ τοίνυν οὐ χρηστῷ Ἕλληνες διαχρεώμενοι ἐμέο ἐλάσαντος μέχρι Μακεδονίης γῆς οὐκ ἦλθον ἐς τούτου λόγον ὥστε μάχεσθαι.		1 2

9C
σοὶ δὲ δὴ μέλλει τίς, ὦ βασιλεῦ, ἀντιώσεσθαι πόλεμον προφέρων, ἄγοντι καὶ πλῆθος τὸ ἐκ τῆς Ἀσίης καὶ νέας τὰς ἁπάσας; ὡς μὲν ἐγὼ δοκέω, οὐκ ἐς τοῦτο θάρσεος ἀνήκει τὰ Ἑλλήνων πρήγματα· εἰ δὲ ἄρα ἔγωγε ψευσθείην γνώμῃ καὶ ἐκεῖνοι ἐπαρθέντες ἀβουλίῃ ἔλθοιεν ἡμῖν ἐς μάχην, μάθοιεν ἂν ὡς εἰμὲν ἀνθρώπων ἄριστοι τὰ πολέμια. ἔστω δ᾽ ὦν μηδὲν ἀπείρητον· αὐτόματον γὰρ οὐδέν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ πείρης πάντα ἀνθρώποισι φιλέει γίνεσθαι.”		1

10
Μαρδόνιος μὲν τοσαῦτα ἐπιλεήνας τὴν Ξέρξεω γνώμην ἐπέπαυτο· σιωπώντων δὲ τῶν ἄλλων Περσέων καὶ οὐ τολμώντων γνώμην ἀποδείκνυσθαι ἀντίην τῇ προκειμένῃ, Ἀρτάβανος ὁ Ὑστάσπεος, πάτρως ἐὼν Ξέρξῃ, τῷ δὴ καὶ πίσυνος ἐὼν ἔλεγε τάδε·		1

10A
“ὦ βασιλεῦ, μὴ λεχθεισέων μὲν γνωμέων ἀντιέων ἀλλήλῃσι οὐκ ἔστι τὴν ἀμείνω αἱρεόμενον ἑλέσθαι, ἀλλὰ δεῖ τῇ εἰρημένῃ χρᾶσθαι, λεχθεισέων δὲ ἔστι, ὥσπερ τὸν χρυσὸν τὸν ἀκήρατον αὐτὸν μὲν ἐπ᾽ ἑωυτοῦ οὐ διαγινώσκομεν, ἐπεὰν δὲ παρατρίψωμεν ἄλλῳ χρυσῷ, διαγινώσκομεν τὸν ἀμείνω. ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ πατρὶ τῷ σῷ, ἀδελφεῷ δὲ ἐμῷ, Δαρείῳ ἠγόρευον μὴ στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ Σκύθας, ἄνδρας οὐδαμόθι γῆς ἄστυ νέμοντας. ὁ δὲ ἐλπίζων Σκύθας τοὺς νομάδας καταστρέψεσθαι ἐμοί τε οὐκ ἐπείθετο, στρατευσάμενός τε πολλοὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς τῆς στρατιῆς ἀποβαλὼν ἀπῆλθε. σὺ δὲ, ὦ βασιλεῦ, μέλλεις ἐπ᾽ ἄνδρας στρατεύεσθαι πολλὸν ἔτι ἀμείνονας ἢ Σκύθας, οἳ κατὰ θάλασσάν τε ἄριστοι καὶ κατὰ γῆν λέγονται εἶναι. τὸ δὲ αὐτοῖσι ἔνεστι δεινόν, ἐμὲ σοὶ δίκαιον ἐστὶ φράζειν.		1 2 3

10B
ζεύξας φῂς τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ἐλᾶν στρατὸν διὰ τῆς Εὐρώπης ἐς τὴν Ἑλλάδα. καὶ δὴ καὶ συνήνεικέ ἤτοι κατὰ γῆν ἢ καὶ κατὰ θάλασσαν ἑσσωθῆναι, ἢ καὶ κατ᾽ ἀμφότερα· οἱ γὰρ ἄνδρες λέγονται εἶναι ἄλκιμοι, πάρεστι δὲ καὶ σταθμώσασθαι, εἰ στρατιήν γε τοσαύτην σὺν Δάτι καὶ Ἀρταφρένεϊ ἐλθοῦσαν ἐς τὴν Ἀττικὴν χώρην μοῦνοι Ἀθηναῖοι διέφθειραν. οὐκ ὦν ἀμφοτέρῃ σφι ἐχώρησε· ἀλλ᾽ ἢν τῇσι νηυσὶ ἐμβάλωσι καὶ νικήσαντες ναυμαχίῃ πλέωσι ἐς τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον καὶ ἔπειτα λύσωσι τὴν γέφυραν, τοῦτο δὴ, βασιλεῦ, γίνεται δεινόν.		1 2

10C
ἐγὼ δὲ οὐδεμιῇ σοφίῃ οἰκηίῃ αὐτὸς ταῦτα συμβάλλομαι, ἀλλ᾽ οἷον κοτὲ ἡμέας ὀλίγου ἐδέησε καταλαβεῖν πάθος, ὅτε πατὴρ <ὁ> σὸς ζεύξας Βόσπορον τὸν Θρηίκιον, γεφυρώσας δὲ ποταμὸν Ἴστρον διέβη ἐπὶ Σκύθας. τότε παντοῖοι ἐγένοντο Σκύθαι δεόμενοι Ἰώνων λῦσαι τὸν πόρον, τοῖσι ἐπετέτραπτο ἡ φυλακὴ τῶν γεφυρέων τοῦ Ἴστρου. καὶ τότε γε Ἱστιαῖος ὁ Μιλήτου τύραννος εἰ ἐπέσπετο τῶν ἄλλων τυράννων τῇ γνώμῃ μηδὲ ἠντιώθη, διέργαστο ἂν τὰ Περσέων πρήγματα. καίτοι καὶ λόγῳ ἀκοῦσαι δεινόν, ἐπ᾽ ἀνδρί γε ἑνὶ πάντα τὰ βασιλέος πρήγματα γεγενῆσθαι.		1 2

10D
σὺ ὦν μὴ βούλευ ἐς κίνδυνον μηδένα τοιοῦτον ἀπικέσθαι μηδεμιῆς ἀνάγκης ἐούσης, ἀλλὰ ἐμοὶ πείθευ· νῦν μὲν τὸν σύλλογον τόνδε διάλυσον· αὖτις δέ, ὅταν τοι δοκῇ, προσκεψάμενος ἐπὶ σεωυτοῦ προαγόρευε τά τοι δοκέει εἶναι ἄριστα. τὸ γὰρ εὖ βουλεύεσθαι κέρδος μέγιστον εὑρίσκω ἐόν· εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἐναντιωθῆναί τι θέλει, βεβούλευται μὲν οὐδὲν ἧσσον εὖ, ἕσσωται δὲ ὑπὸ τῆς τύχης τὸ βούλευμα· ὁ δὲ βουλευσάμενος αἰσχρῶς, εἴ οἱ ἡ τύχη ἐπίσποιτο, εὕρημα εὕρηκε, ἧσσον δὲ οὐδέν οἱ κακῶς βεβούλευται.		1 2

10E
ὁρᾷς τὰ ὑπερέχοντα ζῷα ὡς κεραυνοῖ ὁ θεὸς οὐδὲ ἐᾷ φαντάζεσθαι, τὰ δὲ σμικρὰ οὐδέν μιν κνίζει· ὁρᾷς δὲ ὡς ἐς οἰκήματα τὰ μέγιστα αἰεὶ καὶ δένδρεα τὰ τοιαῦτα ἀποσκήπτει τὰ βέλεα· φιλέει γὰρ ὁ θεὸς τὰ ὑπερέχοντα πάντα κολούειν. οὕτω δὲ καὶ στρατὸς πολλὸς ὑπὸ ὀλίγου διαφθείρεται κατὰ τοιόνδε· ἐπεάν σφι ὁ θεὸς φθονήσας φόβον ἐμβάλῃ ἢ βροντήν, δι᾽ ὦν ἐφθάρησαν ἀναξίως ἑωυτῶν. οὐ γὰρ ἐᾷ φρονέειν μέγα ὁ θεὸς ἄλλον ἢ ἑωυτόν.		1

10F
ἐπειχθῆναι μέν νυν πᾶν πρῆγμα τίκτει σφάλματα, ἐκ τῶν ζημίαι μεγάλαι φιλέουσι γίνεσθαι· ἐν δὲ τῷ ἐπισχεῖν ἔνεστι ἀγαθά, εἰ μὴ παραυτίκα δοκέοντα εἶναι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνὰ χρόνον ἐξεύροι τις ἄν.		1

10G
σοὶ μὲν δὴ ταῦτα, ὦ βασιλεῦ, συμβουλεύω· σὺ δέ, ὦ παῖ Γωβρύεω Μαρδόνιε, παῦσαι λέγων λόγους ματαίους περὶ Ἑλλήνων οὐκ ἐόντων ἀξίων φλαύρως ἀκούειν. Ἕλληνας γὰρ διαβάλλων ἐπαίρεις αὐτὸν βασιλέα στρατεύεσθαι· αὐτοῦ δὲ τούτου εἵνεκα δοκέεις μοι πᾶσαν προθυμίην ἐκτείνειν. μή νυν οὕτω γένηται. διαβολὴ γὰρ ἐστὶ δεινότατον, ἐν τῇ δύο μὲν εἰσὶ οἱ ἀδικέοντες, εἷς δὲ ὁ ἀδικεόμενος. ὁ μὲν γὰρ διαβάλλων ἀδικέει οὐ παρεόντος κατηγορέων, ὁ δὲ ἀδικέει ἀναπειθόμενος πρὶν ἢ ἀτρεκέως ἐκμάθῃ· ὁ δὲ δὴ ἀπεὼν τοῦ λόγου τάδε ἐν αὐτοῖσι ἀδικέεται, διαβληθείς τε ὑπὸ τοῦ ἑτέρου καὶ νομισθεὶς πρὸς τοῦ ἑτέρου κακὸς εἶναι.		1 2

10H
ἀλλ᾽ εἰ δὴ δεῖ γε πάντως ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄνδρας τούτους στρατεύεσθαι, φέρε, βασιλεὺς μὲν αὐτὸς ἐν ἤθεσι τοῖσι Περσέων μενέτω, ἡμέων δὲ ἀμφοτέρων παραβαλλομένων τὰ τέκνα στρατηλάτεε αὐτὸς σὺ ἐπιλεξάμενός τε ἄνδρας τοὺς ἐθέλεις καὶ λαβὼν στρατιὴν ὁκόσην τινὰ βούλεαι. καὶ ἢν μὲν τῇ σὺ λέγεις ἀναβαίνῃ βασιλέϊ τὰ πρήγματα, κτεινέσθων οἱ ἐμοὶ παῖδες, πρὸς δὲ αὐτοῖσι καὶ ἐγώ· ἢν δὲ τῇ ἐγὼ προλέγω, οἱ σοὶ ταῦτα πασχόντων, σὺν δέ σφι καὶ σύ, ἢν ἀπονοστήσῃς. εἰ δὲ ταῦτα μὲν ὑποδύνειν οὐκ ἐθελήσεις, σὺ δὲ πάντως στράτευμα ἀνάξεις ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, ἀκούσεσθαι τινὰ φημὶ τῶν αὐτοῦ τῇδε ὑπολειπομένων Μαρδόνιον, μέγα τι κακὸν ἐξεργασάμενον Πέρσας, ὑπὸ κυνῶν τε καὶ ὀρνίθων διαφορεύμενον ἤ κου ἐν γῇ τῇ Ἀθηναίων ἢ σέ γε ἐν τῇ Λακεδαιμονίων, εἰ μὴ ἄρα καὶ πρότερον κατ᾽ ὁδόν, γνόντα ἐπ᾽ οἵους ἄνδρας ἀναγινώσκεις στρατεύεσθαι βασιλέα.”		1 2 3

Chapters 11–33: A recurring dream persuades Xerxes to proceed with the invasion. Preparation for war takes four years, and then the expeditionary force sets off from Cappodocia to Sardis.

34
ἐς ταύτην ὦν τὴν ἀκτὴν ἐξ Ἀβύδου ὁρμώμενοι ἐγεφύρουν τοῖσι προσέκειτο, τὴν μὲν λευκολίνου Φοίνικες, τὴν δὲ βυβλίνην Αἰγύπτιοι. ἔστι δὲ ἑπτὰ στάδιοι ἐξ Ἀβύδου ἐς τὴν ἀπαντίον. καὶ δὴ ἐζευγμένου τοῦ πόρου ἐπιγενόμενος χειμὼν μέγας συνέκοψέ τε ἐκεῖνα πάντα καὶ διέλυσε.		1

35
ὡς δ᾽ ἐπύθετο Ξέρξης, δεινὰ ποιεύμενος τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ἐκέλευσε τριηκοσίας ἐπικέσθαι μάστιγι πληγὰς καὶ κατεῖναι ἐς τὸ πέλαγος πεδέων ζεῦγος. ἤδη δὲ ἤκουσα ὡς καὶ στιγέας ἅμα τούτοισι ἀπέπεμψε στίξοντας τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον. ἐνετέλλετο δὲ ὦν ῥαπίζοντας λέγειν βάρβαρά τε καὶ ἀτάσθαλα· “ὦ πικρὸν ὕδωρ, δεσπότης τοι δίκην ἐπιτιθεῖ τήνδε, ὅτι μιν ἠδίκησας οὐδὲν πρὸς ἐκείνου ἄδικον παθόν. καὶ βασιλεὺς μὲν Ξέρξης διαβήσεταί σε, ἤν τε σύ γε βούλῃ ἤν τε μή· σοὶ δὲ κατὰ δίκην ἄρα οὐδεὶς ἀνθρώπων θύει ὡς ἐόντι καὶ θολερῷ καὶ ἁλμυρῷ ποταμῷ.” τήν τε δὴ θάλασσαν ἐνετέλλετο τούτοισι ζημιοῦν καὶ τῶν ἐπεστεώτων τῇ ζεύξι τοῦ Ἑλλησπόντου ἀποταμεῖν τὰς κεφαλάς.		1 2 3

Chapters 36–7: Herodotus gives a detailed description of the construction of the replacement pontoon bridges over the Hellespont. The army winters at Sardis. Just as it sets off in the spring for Abydos, there is an eclipse of the sun, which the Magi interpret as predicting the abandonment by the Greeks of their cities.

38
ὡς δ᾽ ἐξήλαυνε τὴν στρατιήν, Πύθιος ὁ Λυδὸς καταρρωδήσας τὸ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ φάσμα ἐπαρθείς τε τοῖσι δωρήμασι ἐλθὼν παρὰ Ξέρξην ἔλεγε τάδε· “ὦ δέσποτα, χρηίσας ἄν τι σεῦ βουλοίμην τυχεῖν, τὸ σοὶ μὲν ἐλαφρὸν τυγχάνει ἐὸν ὑποργῆσαι, ἐμοὶ δὲ μέγα γενόμενον.” Ξέρξης δὲ πᾶν μᾶλλον δοκέων μιν χρηίσειν ἢ τὸ ἐδεήθη, ἔφη τε ὑποργήσειν καὶ δὴ ἀγορεύειν ἐκέλευε ὅτευ δέοιτο. ὁ δὲ ἐπείτε ταῦτα ἤκουσε, ἔλεγε θαρσήσας τάδε· “ὦ δέσποτα, τυγχάνουσί μοι παῖδες ἐόντες πέντε, καί σφεας καταλαμβάνει πάντας ἅμα σοὶ στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα. σὺ δέ, ὦ βασιλεῦ, ἐμὲ ἐς τόδε ἡλικίης ἥκοντα οἰκτίρας τῶν μοι παίδων ἕνα παράλυσον τῆς στρατιῆς τὸν πρεσβύτατον, ἵνα αὐτοῦ τε ἐμεῦ καὶ τῶν χρημάτων ᾖ μελεδωνός. τοὺς δὲ τέσσερας ἄγευ ἅμα σεωυτῷ καὶ πρήξας τὰ νοέεις νοστήσειας ὀπίσω.”		1 2 3

39
κάρτα τε ἐθυμώθη ὁ Ξέρξης καὶ ἀμείβετο τοῖσιδε. “ὦ κακὲ ἄνθρωπε, σὺ ἐτόλμησας ἐμεῦ στρατευομένου αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ ἄγοντος παῖδας ἐμοὺς καὶ ἀδελφεοὺς καὶ οἰκηίους καὶ φίλους μνήσασθαι περὶ σέο παιδός, ἐὼν ἐμὸς δοῦλος, τὸν χρῆν πανοικίῃ αὐτῇ τῇ γυναικὶ συνέπεσθαι; εὖ νυν τόδ᾽ ἐξεπίστασο, ὡς ἐν τοῖσι ὠσὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων οἰκέει ὁ θυμός, ὃς χρηστὰ μὲν ἀκούσας τέρψιος ἐμπιπλεῖ τὸ σῶμα, ὑπεναντία δὲ τούτοισι ἀκούσας ἀνοιδέει. ὅτε μέν νυν χρηστὰ ποιήσας ἕτερα τοιαῦτα ἐπηγγέλλεο, εὐεργεσίῃσι βασιλέα οὐ καυχήσεαι ὑπερβαλέσθαι· ἐπείτε δὲ ἐς τὸ ἀναιδέστερον ἐτράπευ, τὴν μὲν ἀξίην οὐ λάμψεαι, ἐλάσσω δὲ τῆς ἀξίης. σὲ μὲν γὰρ καὶ τοὺς τέσσερας τῶν παίδων ῥύεται τὰ ξείνια· τοῦ δὲ ἑνός, τοῦ περιέχεαι μάλιστα, τῇ ψυχῇ ζημιώσεαι.” ὡς δὲ ταῦτα ὑπεκρίνατο, αὐτίκα ἐκέλευε τοῖσι προσετέτακτο ταῦτα πρήσσειν, τῶν Πυθίου παίδων ἐξευρόντας τὸν πρεσβύτατον μέσον διαταμεῖν, διαταμόντας δὲ τὰ ἡμίτομα διαθεῖναι τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ δεξιὰ τῆς ὁδοῦ, τὸ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά, καὶ ταύτῃ διεξιέναι τὸν στρατόν.		1 2 3

Chapters 40–4: Herodotus describes the army’s departure from Sardis and its progress through Lydia and Mysia. The army drinks the river Scamander dry, and Xerxes visits the citadel of Troy. Arriving at Abydos, Xerxes has a dais of white stone built from which to review his forces.

45
ὡς δὲ ὥρα πάντα μὲν τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ὑπὸ τῶν νεῶν ἀποκεκρυμμένον, πάσας δὲ τὰς ἀκτὰς καὶ τὰ Ἀβυδηνῶν πεδία ἐπίπλεα ἀνθρώπων, ἐνθαῦτα ὁ Ξέρξης ἑωυτὸν ἐμακάρισε, μετὰ δὲ τοῦτο ἐδάκρυσε.		1

46
μαθὼν δέ μιν Ἀρτάβανος ὁ πάτρως, ὃς τὸ πρῶτον γνώμην ἀπεδέξατο ἐλευθέρως οὐ συμβουλεύων Ξέρξῃ στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, οὗτος ὡνὴρ φρασθεὶς Ξέρξην δακρύσαντα εἴρετο τάδε· “ὦ βασιλεῦ, ὡς πολλὸν ἀλλήλων κεχωρισμένα ἐργάσαο νῦν τε καὶ ὀλίγῳ πρότερον· μακαρίσας γὰρ σεωυτὸν δακρύεις.” ὁ δὲ εἶπε· “ἐσῆλθε γάρ με λογισάμενον κατοικτῖραι ὡς βραχὺς εἴη ὁ πᾶς ἀνθρώπινος βίος, εἰ τούτων γε ἐόντων τοσούτων οὐδεὶς ἐς ἑκατοστὸν ἔτος περιέσται.” ὁ δὲ ἀμείβετο λέγων· “ἕτερα τούτου παρὰ τὴν ζόην πεπόνθαμεν οἰκτρότερα. ἐν γὰρ οὕτω βραχέϊ βίῳ οὐδεὶς οὕτως ἄνθρωπος ἐὼν εὐδαίμων πέφυκε, οὔτε τούτων οὔτε τῶν ἄλλων, τῷ οὐ παραστήσεται πολλάκις καὶ οὐκὶ ἅπαξ τεθνάναι βούλεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ ζώειν. αἵ τε γὰρ συμφοραὶ προσπίπτουσαι καὶ αἱ νοῦσοι συνταράσσουσαι καὶ βραχὺν ἐόντα μακρὸν δοκέειν εἶναι ποιεῦσι τὸν βίον. οὕτως ὁ μὲν θάνατος μοχθηρῆς ἐούσης τῆς ζόης καταφυγὴ αἱρετωτάτη τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ γέγονε, ὁ δὲ θεὸς γλυκὺν γεύσας τὸν αἰῶνα φθονερὸς ἐν αὐτῷ εὑρίσκεται ἐών.”		1 2 3 4

47
Ξέρξης δὲ ἀμείβετο λέγων· “Ἀρτάβανε, βιοτῆς μέν νυν ἀνθρωπηίης πέρι, ἐούσης τοιαύτης οἵην περ σὺ διαιρέαι εἶναι, παυσώμεθα, μηδὲ κακῶν μεμνώμεθα χρηστὰ ἔχοντες πρήγματα ἐν χερσί· φράσον δέ μοι τόδε· εἴ τοι ἡ ὄψις τοῦ ἐνυπνίου μὴ ἐναργὴς οὕτω ἐφάνη, εἶχες ἂν τὴν ἀρχαίην γνώμην, οὐκ ἐῶν με στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, ἢ μετέστης ἄν; φέρε τοῦτό μοι ἀτρεκέως εἰπέ.” ὁ δὲ ἀμείβετο λέγων· “ὦ βασιλεῦ, ὄψις μὲν ἡ ἐπιφανεῖσα τοῦ ὀνείρου, ὡς βουλόμεθα ἀμφότεροι, τελευτήσειε· ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἔτι καὶ ἐς τόδε δείματος εἰμὶ ὑπόπλεος οὐδ᾽ ἐντὸς ἐμεωυτοῦ, ἄλλα τε πολλὰ ἐπιλεγόμενος καὶ δὴ καὶ ὁρῶν τοι δύο τὰ μέγιστα πάντων ἐόντα πολεμιώτατα.”		1 2

48
Ξέρξης δὲ πρὸς ταῦτα ἀμείβετο τοῖσιδε· Δαιμόνιε ἀνδρῶν, κοῖα ταῦτα δύο λέγεις εἶναι μοι πολεμιώτατα; κότερά τοι ὁ πεζὸς μεμπτὸς κατὰ πλῆθος ἐστὶ, καὶ τὸ Ἑλληνικὸν στράτευμα φαίνεται πολλαπλήσιον ἔσεσθαι τοῦ ἡμετέρου, ἢ τὸ ναυτικὸν τὸ ἡμέτερον λείψεσθαι τοῦ ἐκείνων, ἢ καὶ συναμφότερα ταῦτα; εἰ γάρ τοι ταύτῃ φαίνεται ἐνδεέστερα εἶναι τὰ ἡμέτερα πρήγματα, στρατοῦ ἂν ἄλλου τις τὴν ταχίστην ἄγερσιν ποιοιτο.		1

49
ὃ δ᾽ ἀμείβετο λέγων· “ὦ βασιλεῦ, οὔτε στρατὸν τοῦτον, ὅστις γε σύνεσιν ἔχει, μέμφοιτ᾽ ἂν οὔτε τῶν νεῶν τὸ πλῆθος· ἢν δὲ πλεῦνας συλλέξῃς, τὰ δύο τοι τὰ λέγω πολλῷ ἔτι πολεμιώτερα γίνεται. τὰ δὲ δύο ταῦτα ἐστὶ γῆ τε καὶ θάλασσα. οὔτε γὰρ τῆς θαλάσσης ἐστὶ λιμὴν τοσοῦτος οὐδαμόθι, ὡς ἐγὼ εἰκάζω, ὅστις ἐγειρομένου χειμῶνος δεξάμενός σευ τοῦτο τὸ ναυτικὸν φερέγγυος ἔσται διασῶσαι τὰς νέας. καίτοι οὐκὶ ἕνα αὐτὸν δεῖ εἶναι τὸν λιμένα, ἀλλὰ παρὰ πᾶσαν τὴν ἤπειρον παρ᾽ ἣν δὴ κομίζεαι. οὔκων ὦν δὴ ἐόντων τοι λιμένων ὑποδεξίων, μάθε ὅτι αἱ συμφοραὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἄρχουσι καὶ οὐκὶ ὥνθρωποι τῶν συμφορέων. καὶ δὴ τῶν δύο τοι τοῦ ἑτέρου εἰρημένου τὸ ἕτερον ἔρχομαι ἐρέων. γῆ δὲ πολεμίη τῇδέ τοι κατίσταται· εἰ θέλει τοι μηδὲν ἀντίξοον καταστῆναι, τοσούτῳ τοι γίνεται πολεμιωτέρη ὅσῳ ἂν προβαίνῃς ἑκαστέρω, τὸ πρόσω αἰεὶ κλεπτόμενος· εὐπρηξίης δὲ οὐκ ἔστι ἀνθρώποισι οὐδεμία πληθώρη. καὶ δή τοι, ὡς οὐδενὸς ἐναντιευμένου, λέγω τὴν χώρην πλεῦνα ἐν πλέονι χρόνῳ γινομένην λιμὸν τέξεσθαι. ἀνὴρ δὲ οὕτω ἂν εἴη ἄριστος, εἰ βουλευόμενος μὲν ἀρρωδέοι, πᾶν ἐπιλεγόμενος πείσεσθαι χρῆμα, ἐν δὲ τῷ ἔργῳ θρασὺς εἴη.”		1 2 3 4 5

50
ἀμείβεται Ξέρξης τοῖσιδε· “Ἀρτάβανε, οἰκότως μὲν σύ γε τούτων ἕκαστα διαιρέαι, ἀτὰρ μήτε πάντα φοβέο μήτε πᾶν ὁμοίως ἐπιλέγεο. εἰ γὰρ δὴ βούλοιο ἐπὶ τῷ αἰεὶ ἐπεσφερομένῳ πρήγματι τὸ πᾶν ὁμοίως ἐπιλέγεσθαι, ποιήσειας ἂν οὐδαμὰ οὐδέν· κρέσσον δὲ πάντα θαρσέοντα ἥμισυ τῶν δεινῶν πάσχειν μᾶλλον ἢ πᾶν χρῆμα προδειμαίνοντα μηδαμὰ μηδὲν παθεῖν. εἰ δὲ ἐριζων πρὸς πᾶν τὸ λεγόμενον μὴ τὸ βέβαιον ἀποδέξεις, σφάλλεσθαι ὀφείλεις ἐν αὐτοῖσι ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ ὑπεναντία τούτοισι λέξας. τοῦτο μέν νυν ἐπ᾽ ἴσης ἔχει· εἰδέναι δὲ ἄνθρωπον ἐόντα κῶς χρὴ τὸ βέβαιον; δοκέω μὲν οὐδαμῶς. τοῖσι τοίνυν βουλομένοισι ποιέειν ὡς τὸ ἐπίπαν φιλέει γίνεσθαι τὰ κέρδεα, τοῖσι δὲ ἐπιλεγομένοισί τε πάντα καὶ ὀκνέουσι οὐ μάλα ἐθέλει. ὁρᾷς τὰ Περσέων πρήγματα ἐς ὃ δυνάμιος προκεχώρηκε. εἰ τοίνυν ἐκεῖνοι οἱ πρὸ ἐμεῦ γενόμενοι βασιλέες γνώμῃσι ἐχρέωντο ὁμοίῃσι καὶ σύ, ἢ μὴ χρεώμενοι γνώμῃσι τοιαύτῃσι ἄλλους συμβούλους εἶχον τοιούτους, οὐκ ἄν κοτε εἶδες αὐτὰ ἐς τοῦτο προελθόντα· νῦν δὲ κινδύνους ἀναρριπτέοντες ἐς τοῦτο σφέα προηγάγοντο. μεγάλα γὰρ πρήγματα μεγάλοισι κινδύνοισι ἐθέλει καταιρέεσθαι. ἡμεῖς τοίνυν ὁμοιεύμενοι ἐκείνοισι ὥρην τε τοῦ ἔτεος καλλίστην πορευόμεθα καὶ καταστρεψάμενοι πᾶσαν τὴν Εὐρώπην νοστήσομεν ὀπίσω, οὔτε λιμῷ ἐντυχόντες οὐδαμόθι οὔτε ἄλλο ἄχαρι οὐδὲν παθόντες. τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ αὐτοὶ πολλὴν φορβὴν φερόμενοι πορευόμεθα, τοῦτο δέ, τῶν ἄν κου ἐπιβέωμεν γῆν καὶ ἔθνος, τούτων τὸν σῖτον ἕξομεν· ἐπ᾽ ἀροτῆρας δὲ καὶ οὐ νομάδας στρατευόμεθα ἄνδρας.”		1 2 3 4

51
λέγει Ἀρτάβανος μετὰ ταῦτα· “ὦ βασιλεῦ, ἐπείτε ἀρρωδέειν οὐδὲν ἐᾷς πρῆγμα, σὺ δέ μευ συμβουλίην ἔνδεξαι· ἀναγκαίως γὰρ ἔχει περὶ πολλῶν πρηγμάτων πλεῦνα λόγον ἐκτεῖναι. Κῦρος ὁ Καμβύσεω Ἰωνίην πᾶσαν πλὴν Ἀθηναίων κατεστρέψατο δασμοφόρον εἶναι Πέρσῃσι. τούτους ὦν τοὺς ἄνδρας συμβουλεύω τοι μηδεμιῇ μηχανῇ ἄγειν ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας· καὶ γὰρ ἄνευ τούτων οἷοί τε εἰμὲν τῶν ἐχθρῶν κατυπέρτεροι γίνεσθαι. ἢ γὰρ σφέας, ἢν ἕπωνται, δεῖ ἀδικωτάτους γίνεσθαι καταδουλουμένους τὴν μητρόπολιν, ἢ δικαιοτάτους συνελευθεροῦντας. ἀδικώτατοι μέν νυν γινόμενοι οὐδὲν κέρδος μέγα ἡμῖν προσβάλλουσι, δικαιότατοι δὲ γινόμενοι οἷοί τε δηλήσασθαι μεγάλως τὴν σὴν στρατιὴν γίνονται. ἐς θυμὸν ὦν βάλευ καὶ τὸ παλαιὸν ἔπος ὡς εὖ εἴρηται, τὸ μὴ ἅμα ἀρχῇ πᾶν τέλος καταφαίνεσθαι.”		1 2 3

52
ἀμείβεται πρὸς ταῦτα Ξέρξης· “Ἀρτάβανε, τῶν ἀπεφήναο γνωμέων σφάλλεαι κατὰ ταύτην δὴ μάλιστα, ὃς Ἴωνας φοβέαι μὴ μεταβάλωσι, τῶν ἔχομεν γνῶμα μέγιστον, τῶν σύ τε μάρτυς γίνεαι καὶ οἱ συστρατευσάμενοι Δαρείῳ ἄλλοι ἐπὶ Σκύθας, ὅτι ἐπὶ τούτοισι ἡ πᾶσα Περσικὴ στρατιὴ ἐγένετο διαφθεῖραι καὶ περιποιῆσαι· οἳ δὲ δικαιοσύνην καὶ πιστότητα ἐνέδωκαν, ἄχαρι δὲ οὐδέν. πάρεξ δὲ τούτου, ἐν τῇ ἡμετέρῃ καταλιπόντας τέκνα καὶ γυναῖκας καὶ χρήματα οὐδ᾽ ἐπιλέγεσθαι χρὴ νεώτερόν τι ποιήσειν. οὕτω μηδὲ τοῦτο φοβέο, ἀλλὰ θυμὸν ἔχων ἀγαθὸν σῷζε οἶκόν τε τὸν ἐμὸν καὶ τυραννίδα τὴν ἐμήν· σοὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ μούνῷ ἐκ πάντων σκῆπτρα τὰ ἐμὰ ἐπιτρέπω.”		1 2

101
ὡς δὲ καὶ ταύτας διεξέπλωσε καὶ ἐξέβη ἐκ τῆς νεός, μετεπέμψατο Δημάρητον τὸν Ἀρίστωνος συστρατευόμενον αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, καλέσας δ᾽ αὐτὸν εἴρετο τάδε· “Δημάρητε, νῦν μοι σὲ ἡδύ τι ἐστὶ εἰρέσθαι τὰ θέλω. σὺ εἶς Ἕλλην τε, καὶ ὡς ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι σεῦ τε καὶ τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων τῶν ἐμοὶ ἐς λόγους ἀπικνεομένων, πόλιος οὔτ᾽ ἐλαχίστης οὔτ᾽ ἀσθενεστάτης. νῦν ὦν μοι τόδε φράσον, εἰ Ἕλληνες ὑπομενέουσι χεῖρας ἐμοὶ ἀνταειρόμενοι. οὐ γάρ, ὡς ἐγὼ δοκέω, οὐδ᾽ εἰ πάντες Ἕλληνες καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ πρὸς ἑσπέρης οἰκέοντες ἄνθρωποι συλλεχθείησαν, οὐκ ἀξιόμαχοι εἰσὶ ἐμὲ ἐπιόντα ὑπομεῖναι, μὴ ἐόντες ἄρθμιοι. ἐθέλω μέντοι καὶ τὸ ἀπὸ σεῦ, ὁκοῖόν τι λέγεις περὶ αὐτῶν, πυθέσθαι.” ὃ μὲν ταῦτα εἰρώτα, ὁ δὲ ὑπολαβὼν ἔφη· “βασιλεῦ, κότερα ἀληθείῃ χρήσωμαι πρὸς σὲ ἢ ἡδονῇ;” ὁ δέ μιν ἀληθείῃ χρήσασθαι ἐκέλευε, φὰς οὐδέν οἱ ἀηδέστερον ἔσεσθαι ἢ πρότερον ἦν.		1 2 3

102
ὡς δὲ ταῦτα ἤκουσε Δημάρητος, ἔλεγε τάδε· “βασιλεῦ, ἐπειδὴ ἀληθείῃ διαχρήσασθαι πάντως κελεύεις ταῦτα λέγοντα τὰ μὴ ψευδόμενός τις ὕστερον ὑπὸ σεῦ ἁλώσεται, τῇ Ἑλλάδι πενίη μὲν αἰεί κοτε σύντροφος ἐστί, ἀρετὴ δὲ ἔπακτος ἐστί, ἀπό τε σοφίης κατεργασμένη καὶ νόμου ἰσχυροῦ· τῇ διαχρεωμένη ἡ Ἑλλὰς τήν τε πενίην ἀπαμύνεται καὶ τὴν δεσποσύνην. αἰνέω μέν νυν πάντας Ἕλληνας τοὺς περὶ ἐκείνους τοὺς Δωρικοὺς χώρους οἰκημένους, ἔρχομαι δὲ λέξων οὐ περὶ πάντων τούσδε τοὺς λόγους, ἀλλὰ περὶ Λακεδαιμονίων μούνων, πρῶτα μὲν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι ὅκως κοτὲ σοὺς δέξονται λόγους δουλοσύνην φέροντας τῇ Ἑλλάδι, αὖτις δὲ ὡς ἀντιώσονταί τοι ἐς μάχην καὶ ἢν οἱ ἄλλοι Ἕλληνες πάντες τὰ σὰ φρονέωσι. ἀριθμοῦ δὲ πέρι, μή πύθῃ ὅσοι τινὲς ἐόντες ταῦτα ποιέειν οἷοί τε εἰσί· ἤν τε γὰρ τύχωσι ἐξεστρατευμένοι χίλιοι, οὗτοι μαχήσονταί τοι, ἤν τε ἐλάσσονες τούτων, ἤν τε καὶ πλεῦνες.”		1 2 3

103
ταῦτα ἀκούσας Ξέρξης γελάσας ἔφη· “Δημάρητε, οἷον ἐφθέγξαο ἔπος, ἄνδρας χιλίους στρατιῇ τοσῇδε μαχήσεσθαι. ἄγε, εἰπέ μοι, σὺ φῂς τούτων τῶν ἀνδρῶν βασιλεὺς αὐτὸς γενέσθαι. σὺ ὦν ἐθελήσεις αὐτίκα μάλα πρὸς ἄνδρας δέκα μάχεσθαι; καίτοι εἰ τὸ πολιτικὸν ὑμῖν πᾶν ἐστι τοιοῦτον οἷον σὺ διαιρέεις, σέ γε τὸν κείνων βασιλέα πρέπει πρὸς τὸ διπλήσιον ἀντιτάσσεσθαι κατὰ νόμους τοὺς ὑμετέρους. εἰ γὰρ κείνων ἕκαστος δέκα ἀνδρῶν τῆς στρατιῆς τῆς ἐμῆς ἀντάξιος ἐστί, σὲ δέ γε δίζημαι εἴκοσι εἶναι ἀντάξιον· καὶ οὕτω μὲν ὀρθοῖτ᾽ ἂν ὁ λόγος ὁ παρὰ σεῦ εἰρημένος· εἰ δὲ τοιοῦτοί τε ἐόντες καὶ μεγάθεα τοσοῦτοι, ὅσοι σύ τε καὶ οἳ παρ᾽ ἐμὲ φοιτῶσι Ἑλλήνων ἐς λόγους, αὐχέετε τοσοῦτον, ὅρα μὴ μάτην κόμπος ὁ λόγος οὗτος εἰρημένος ᾖ. ἐπεὶ φέρε ἴδω παντὶ τῷ οἰκότι· κῶς ἂν δυναίατο χίλιοι ἢ καὶ μύριοι ἢ καὶ πεντακισμύριοι, ἐόντες γε ἐλεύθεροι πάντες ὁμοίως καὶ μὴ ὑπ᾽ ἑνὸς ἀρχόμενοι, στρατῷ τοσῷδε ἀντιστῆναι; ἐπεί τοι πλεῦνες περὶ ἕνα ἕκαστον γινόμεθα ἢ χίλιοι, ἐόντων ἐκείνων πέντε χιλιάδων. ὑπὸ μὲν γὰρ ἑνὸς ἀρχόμενοι κατὰ τρόπον τὸν ἡμέτερον γενοίατ᾽ ἄν δειμαίνοντες τοῦτον καὶ παρὰ τὴν ἑωυτῶν φύσιν ἀμείνονες καὶ ἴοιεν ἀναγκαζόμενοι μάστιγι ἐς πλεῦνας ἐλάσσονες ἐόντες· ἀνειμένοι δὲ ἐς τὸ ἐλεύθερον οὐκ ἂν ποιέοιεν τούτων οὐδέτερα. δοκέω δὲ ἔγωγε καὶ ἀνισωθέντας πλήθεϊ χαλεπῶς ἂν Ἕλληνας Πέρσῃσι μούνοισι μάχεσθαι. ἀλλὰ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν μέν μούνοισι τοῦτο ἐστὶ τὸ σὺ λέγεις, ἔστι γε μέντοι οὐ πολλὸν ἀλλὰ σπάνιον· εἰσὶ γὰρ Περσέων τῶν ἐμῶν αἰχμοφόρων οἳ ἐθελήσουσι Ἑλλήνων ἀνδράσι τρισὶ ὁμοῦ μάχεσθαι· τῶν σὺ ἐὼν ἄπειρος πολλὰ φλυηρέεις.”		1 2 3 4 5

104
πρὸς ταῦτα Δημάρητος λέγει· “ὦ βασιλεῦ, ἀρχῆθεν ἠπιστάμην ὅτι ἀληθείῃ χρεώμενος οὐ φίλα τοι ἐρέω· σὺ δὲ ἐπεὶ ἠνάγκασας λέγειν τῶν λόγων τοὺς ἀληθεστάτους, ἔλεγον τὰ κατήκοντα Σπαρτιήτῃσι. καίτοι ὡς ἐγὼ τυγχάνω τὰ νῦν τάδε ἐστοργὼς ἐκείνους, αὐτὸς μάλιστα ἐξεπίστεαι, οἵ με τιμήν τε καὶ γέρεα ἀπελόμενοι πατρώια ἄπολίν τε καὶ φυγάδα πεποιήκασι, πατὴρ δὲ <ὁ> σὸς ὑποδεξάμενος βίον τέ μοι καὶ οἶκον ἔδωκε. οὐκ ὦν οἰκός ἐστι ἄνδρα τὸν σώφρονα εὐνοίην φαινομένην διωθέεσθαι, ἀλλὰ στέργειν μάλιστα. ἐγὼ δὲ ὁ οὔτε δέκα ἀνδράσι ὑπίσχομαι οἷός τε εἶναι μάχεσθαι οὔτε δυοῖσι, ἑκών τε εἶναι οὐδ᾽ ἂν μουνομαχέοιμι. εἰ δὲ ἀναγκαίη εἴη ἢ μέγας τις ὁ ἐποτρύνων ἀγών, μαχοίμην ἂν πάντων ἥδιστα ἑνὶ τούτων τῶν ἀνδρῶν οἳ Ἑλλήνων ἕκαστος φησὶ τριῶν ἄξιος εἶναι. ὣς δὲ καὶ Λακεδαιμόνιοι κατὰ μὲν ἕνα μαχόμενοι οὐδαμῶν εἰσι κακίονες ἀνδρῶν, ἁλέες δὲ ἄριστοι ἀνδρῶν ἁπάντων. ἐλεύθεροι γὰρ ἐόντες οὐ πάντα ἐλεύθεροι εἰσί· ἔπεστι γάρ σφι δεσπότης νόμος, τὸν ὑποδειμαίνουσι πολλῷ ἔτι μᾶλλον ἢ οἱ σοὶ σέ. ποιεῦσι γῶν τὰ ἂν ἐκεῖνος ἀνώγῃ· ἀνώγει δὲ τὠυτὸ αἰεί, οὐκ ἐῶν φεύγειν οὐδὲν πλῆθος ἀνθρώπων ἐκ μάχης, ἀλλὰ μένοντας ἐν τῇ τάξι ἐπικρατέειν ἢ ἀπόλλυσθαι. σοὶ δὲ εἰ φαίνομαι ταῦτα λέγων φλυηρέειν, ἀλλὰ σιγᾶν θέλω τὸ λοιπόν· νῦν τε ἀναγκασθεὶς ἔλεξα. γένοιτο μέντοι κατὰ νόον τοι, βασιλεῦ.”		1 2 3 4 5

105
ὁ μὲν δὴ ταῦτα ἀμείψατο, Ξέρξης δὲ ἐς γέλωτά τε ἔτρεψε καὶ οὐκ ἐποιήσατο ὀργὴν οὐδεμίαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἠπίως αὐτὸν ἀπεπέμψατο. τούτῳ δὲ ἐς λόγους ἐλθὼν Ξέρξης καὶ ὕπαρχον ἐν τῷ Δορίσκῳ τούτῳ καταστήσας Μασκάμην τὸν Μεγαδόστεω, τὸν δὲ ὑπὸ Δαρείου σταθέντα καταπαύσας, ἐξήλαυνε τὸν στρατὸν διὰ τῆς Θρηίκης ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα.		1

Commentary Notes

Preliminary notes

Rather than attempt to pick out individual examples as they occur, I refer the reader to the section ‘Herodotus’ language’ in the introduction, which clarifies the quirks of dialect encountered.

The abbreviation cf. is used throughout. Standing for Latin confer (although this is forgotten now and the abbreviation has simply entered standard usage) this means ‘compare’ and is used to draw the reader’s attention to other passages similar to or casting light on the one being discussed.

7.5.1

ἀνεχώρησε: the verb, which literally means to go backwards, is used when the succession comes back or reverts to the person seen as the rightful heir.

Ξέρξην: Xerxes was Darius I’s son by his wife Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus the Great. The rival claimant was Artobazanes, the eldest of all Darius’ children, born before his father attained the throne. Herodotus has explained through the speech of the Spartan Demaratus in 7.3 that the fact that his father was already king when he was born, while only a private citizen when Artobazanes was born, was a decisive factor in the choice of Xerxes as heir. Demaratus himself had fallen foul of this system of succession (known as porphyrogeniture: ‘born to the purple’) when he was deposed as co-king of Sparta by Cleomenes. Despite the prime role given to Demaratus here by Herodotus, Xerxes’ descent from Cyrus was in fact possibly more significant, as it ensured that succession remained within the Achaemenid family.

ἐπὶ δὲ Αἴγυπτον: to quell the rebellion against the Persian rule initiated by Cambyses, as described by Herodotus in Book 3.

δυνάμενος παρ᾽ αὐτῷ μέγιστον Περσέων: ‘who had the most influence with him of all the Persians’.

Μαρδόνιος ὁ Γοβρύεω: Mardonius the son of Gobryas. In Book 3 of the Histories, Herodotus tells the story of the conspiracy that deposed ‘Smerdis’ (also known as Gaumata) and put Darius on the throne. Gobryas was one of the six conspirators, and Mardonius his son by Darius’ sister. Darius appointed Mardonius a general but after his fleet was destroyed rounding Mount Athos he was relieved of his command, as described by Herodotus in 6.94. This episode marks his return to favour with Xerxes. The Athenian tragedian Aeschylus, in his play Persians, puts a speech into the mouth of Xerxes’ mother, Atossa, attributing his decision to invade Greece to the advice of ‘evil men’: Mardonius is clearly meant to be the chief of these.

7.5.2

Δέσποτα: ‘Master’, ‘Lord’: to an Athenian, this form of address would sound servile and characteristic of Eastern tyrannical rule.

τῶν ἐποίησαν: ‘for the things which they have done’: an example of relative attraction, the phenomenon in Greek whereby a relative pronoun is ‘attracted’ from its proper case into the case of its antecedent, especially from the accusative into the genitive (as here), or dative. The demonstrative pronoun to whose case the relative is attracted is usually omitted, as is the case in this example.

εἰ τὸ μὲν νῦν ταῦτα πρήσσοις τά περ ἐν χερσὶ ἔχεις: the use of εἰ + optative here, that is, the first part (protasis) of a conditional without the second part (apodosis) expressed, has the force of a mild imperative: ‘by all means for the time being do the things you have on hand’. English has a similar idiom whereby someone might say ‘If you’d like to take a seat …’ implying an omitted apodosis (‘… the Doctor will see you in a few minutes’) but meaning simply ‘Please take a seat’.

λόγος τέ σε ἔχῃ πρὸς ἀνθρώπων ἀγαθός: note that we need to transpose the subject and object in translating this phrase to make better English sense, so not ‘a fine reputation will have you’ but ‘you will have a fine reputation’. Mardonius offers additional motivation for Xerxes to attack Athens aside from the revenge he has already outlined: first that it will enhance Xerxes’ worldwide reputation, then that others will think twice before they attack Persia.

7.5.3

οὗτος μέν οἱ ὁ λόγος: ‘this argument of his’. οἱ is the dative relative pronoun, used possessively.

ἡ Εὐρώπη περικαλλὴς εἴη χώρη: Mardonius adds to his speech urging vengeance alluring facts about the beauty and fruitfulness of Europe in order to induce Xerxes to invade.

δένδρεα παντοῖα φέρει τὰ ἥμερα: ‘all kinds of fruit-bearing trees’, so not just olives, although these were the chief economic crop in ancient Athens. We see in 7.31 how fond Xerxes is of trees, so this is a telling detail for Mardonius to include in his argument.

ἀρετήν τε ἄκρη: the accusative of respect: ‘the pinnacle as regards excellence’.

βασιλέϊ τε μούνῳ θνητῶν ἀξίη ἐκτῆσθαι: Mardonius’ speech ends on a note of flattery: of all mortals, only the king deserves to possess such a land.

7.6.1

νεωτέρων ἔργων: ‘novel enterprises’ or ‘adventures’: Herodotus suggests that Mardonius is at least partly motivated simply by his own thrill-seeking nature.

θέλων αὐτὸς τῆς Ἑλλάδος ὕπαρχος εἶναι: Mardonius’ other motivation is personal advancement. He wishes, Herodotus says, to become the governor of Greece; the position is that of satrap, Persian provincial ruler, with supreme power in his region, but ultimately answerable to the Great King.

χρόνῳ δὲ κατεργάσατό: the combination of these two words, χρόνῳ meaning ‘finally’ and κατεργάσατό ‘he worked away at’ or ‘he achieved by working’, effectively conveys the idea that Mardonius kept on at Xerxes until he got his way.

οἱ σύμμαχα: ‘helpful to him’.

ἐς τὸ πείθεσθαι: the article + infinitive makes a verbal noun (gerund) in Greek, so ‘for the persuading of’, but it can be translated ‘for persuading’.

7.6.2

τοῦτο μὲν … τοῦτο δὲ: picking up and explaining ἄλλα from the previous sentence.

τῶν Ἀλευαδέων: a Thessalian noble family who claimed descent from a mythical character called Aleuas, who had been given the gift of prophecy by a serpent. Herodotus’ classification of them as ‘kings’ is generally regarded as rather loose. They are mentioned in a couple more places in Herodotus – in 7.172 the other Thessalians are portrayed as fed up with the Aleuadae’s political manoeuvrings.

Πεισιστρατιδέων: the Peisistratidae were the family of Athenian tyrants, named for their patriarch Peisistratus. Peisistratus’ son Hippias had ruled Athens at the end of the sixth century BC and, following his exile, had taken refuge in Persia, leading Darius to Marathon in the invasion of 490 BC.

Σοῦσα: this great ancient city of Susa had been captured by Cyrus the Great and had become one of four capital cities of the Achaemenid empire.

7.6.3

Ὀνομάκριτον … Μουσαίου: Onomacritus was a compiler of oracles, or chresmologue. As Herodotus explains here, he had been hired by Peisistratus to compile the oracles of Musaeus, a legendary figure closely associated with Orpheus, but had fallen out of favour and been expelled by Hipparchus when caught forging the oracles. The traveller and geographer Pausanias says, ‘I have read verses in which Musaeus receives from the North Wind the gift of flight, but, in my opinion, Onomacritus wrote them, and there are no certainly genuine works of Musaeus except a hymn to Demeter written for the Lycomidae’ (Pausanias 1.22.7).

Λάσου τοῦ Ἑρμιονέος: Lasus of Hermione was a lyric poet. Hipparchus was known as a sponsor and patron of poetry. The detail that Lasus exposed Onomacritus might give a small insight into the vying for position typical of the tyrannical court.

αἱ ἐπὶ Λήμνῳ ἐπικείμεναι νῆσοι ἀφανιζοίατο κατὰ τῆς θαλάσσης: not as outlandish as it might sound at first, since in a region of submarine volcanic activity islands do appear and disappear. The disappearance of the island of Chryse, one of those described by Herodotus here, is mentioned by Pausanias: ‘No long sail from Lemnos was once an island Chryse, where, it is said, Philoctetes met with his accident from the water-snake. But the waves utterly overwhelmed it, and Chryse sank and disappeared in the depths’ (Pausanias 8.33.4).

7.6.4

πρότερον χρεώμενος: the participle has a concessive force; ‘although he had formerly relied on him’.

τὰ μάλιστα: = ‘to the greatest extent’, ‘above all’, ‘particularly’.

σφάλμα φέρον: ‘portending defeat/disaster’.

τῶν μὲν ἔλεγε οὐδέν: this highlights one of the problems of placing faith in soothsayers: the desire to please leads to suppression of unfavourable or unpalatable oracles.

τόν τε Ἑλλήσποντον: the Hellespont is the strait today called the Dardanelles. Separating Asia from Europe and allowing access from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, it has been an area of military and economic significance since ancient times.

ζευχθῆναι: the verb literally means ‘to join together under a yoke’ (as farm animals) so comes to mean to ‘yoke’ two banks of a river together, in other words to bridge the river.

χρεὸν: ‘that which is necessary’, ‘fate’.

7.6.5

οὗτός τε δὴ χρησμῳδέων προσεφέρετο, καὶ οἵ τε Πεισιστρατίδαι καὶ οἱ Ἀλευάδαι γνώμας ἀποδεικνύμενοι: this sentence gives a vivid idea of the number of influences and arguments surrounding and placing pressure upon Xerxes. The Peisistratids were the family of the Athenian tyrants Peisistratus and his sons and joint successors Hippias and Hipparchus, who ruled Athens from 546 to 510 BC. The Aleuadae were the ruling dynasty of Thessaly.

7.7.1

ὡς δὲ ἀνεγνώσθη: ‘when he had been persuaded’: the verb and its prominent placement make clear Herodotus’ view that Xerxes has been brought to this decision by outside influences and not of his own volition.

ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀπεστεῶτας: Egypt had been under Persian rule since the 520s BC and archaeological evidence shows that Darius treated it as an important part of the empire, drafting laws and building a navigable waterway from the Nile to the Red Sea. Herodotus does not dwell on this rebellion, maintaining focus on the invasion of Greece.

δουλοτέρην: Herodotus makes it clear that the consequences of the rebellion for the Egyptians were negative. Whereas Darius had earned a reputation for religious tolerance, supporting the country’s temples, Xerxes promoted Zoroastrianism over Egyptian religion and stopped funding Egyptian monuments. Moreover, he exacted more punishing tribute, most likely because of the requirements of the invasion of Greece he was planning.

Ἀχαιμένεϊ, ἀδελφεῷ μὲν ἑωυτοῦ: Achaemenes was Xerxes’ full brother, here being made provincial governor, or satrap, of Egypt. (See note on 7.6.1 above for discussion of this role.) Inarus the Libyan led a rebellion in 460 BC with help from Athenian allies which inflicted considerable damage on the Persians before Inarus was finally defeated, taken to Susa and either crucified or impaled. Herodotus has already mentioned his death at 3.12, where he includes the detail that he himself, while visiting Egypt, inspected the skulls of those who had been killed by Inarus and his rebels and found that the Egyptian skulls were much tougher than the rather brittle Persian ones.

7.8.1

ἐπὶ τὰς Ἀθήνας: in the previous chapter, the expedition was described as ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα. Clearly for the Persians the initial focus was on the Athenians, since revenge for Marathon was the motivating factor, but for Herodotus and his readership, and indeed in terms of the actual war, the fight was against an unprecedentedly united Greek nation.

σύλλογον ἐπίκλητον: a council of Persian nobles summoned when there was an important decision to be made, to provide an at least notional check on the power of an absolute ruler. However, as Herodotus makes clear in describing a similar council in Book 9, fear could be an inhibiting factor: no-one dares to speak against the opinion of the king for fear of incurring his wrath. The Darius vase, found in Apulia in the late eighteenth century, shows in its central band of decoration a scene of Darius enthroned surrounded by just such a council of nobles, who are expressing fear and alarm at the news brought by a bearded messenger shown at Darius’ feet.

7.8.A1

Xerxes opens the debate with a speech setting out his plan to invade Greece. With self-confidence he claims that in so acting he will merely be following the pattern set by his predecessors, all of whom sought to enlarge the scope of Persian rule. Further, he will be enacting a just revenge against the Athenians and in doing so taking up the cause left unfinished at his death by Darius. So reasonable, in fact, does much of it sound that it is hard to remember that it was written by a Greek. Herodotus’ skill at putting the appropriate words into the mouths of his protagonists is remarkable. Some of what he says would perhaps, however, have sounded overweening to a Greek audience: his plans to bridge the Hellespont and bring the Persian empire to the edge of Zeus’ realm would have smacked of hubristic over-confidence.

οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς κατηγήσομαι νόμον τόνδε ἐν ὑμῖν τιθείς, παραδεξάμενός τε αὐτῷ χρήσομαι: Xerxes points out that in seeking to add to the empire he is not behaving differently from his predecessors as king.

Ἀστυάγεα: Astyages was the last king of the Median empire, deposed by Cyrus the Great in 550 BC. The story of the rise of Cyrus is told by Herodotus in 1.95ff.

θεός … ἄγει: The assertion of divine approbation would have struck an ancient reader as hubristic, borne out by numerous episodes in history and literature where characters who claim such approval of their schemes receive a decided comeuppance from the gods. cf. the speech Xenophon puts into his own mouth in Anabasis 6.3.18: ‘And it may be that the god is guiding events in this way, he who wills that those who talked boastfully, as though possessed of superior wisdom, should be brought low, and that we, who always begin with the gods, should be set in a place of higher honour than those boasters.’ Herodotus himself in Book 1 relates the story of Croesus of Lydia, who consulted the Delphic oracle before launching a campaign against Cyrus. The oracle told him that if he crossed his borders, he would destroy a great empire: certain that this meant the empire of Cyrus, Croesus proceeded confidently with the invasion, only to realize in defeat that the empire referred to was his own.

συμφέρεται ἐπὶ τὸ ἄμεινον: ‘it turns out for the better’.

τὰ μέν νυν Κῦρός … οὐκ ἄν τις λέγοι: the transposition of the clauses in this sentence adds emphasis to the actions of Cyrus, Cambyses and Darius.

7.8A.2

ὅκως μὴ λείψομαι τῶν πρότερον γενομένων: the verb in the passive has the meaning ‘fall short of’ ‘be inferior to’ and is followed by a genitive because of the necessary comparison implied.

In his Persians, Aeschylus shows Xerxes’ mother Atossa speaking to the ghost of his father Darius. She ascribes similar motivation to him to that put into his own mouth by Herodotus: ‘they kept telling him that, whereas you won plentiful treasure for your children by your spear, he, on his part, through lack of manly spirit, played the warrior at home and did not increase his father’s wealth. Hearing such taunts many a time from evil counsellors, he planned this expedition and army against Hellas.’ As mentioned in the introduction, Herodotus would have been familiar with the play, and his narrative accords with it closely.

κῦδος: heroic glory, as, for example, at Homer, Iliad 16.84, where Achilles is encouraging Patroclus, who is about to take the field on his behalf:

ὡς ἄν μοι τιμὴν μεγάλην καὶ κῦδος ἄρηαι

πρὸς πάντων Δαναῶν

‘so that you might win me great honour and glory at the hands of all the Danaans’.

We of course derive our word ‘kudos’ directly from the Greek.

παμφορωτέρην: the fruitfulness of Greece is emphasized, as Xerxes echoes the earlier persuasive words of Mardonius at 7.5.3.

τιμωρίην τε καὶ τίσιν: the dual motivation of imperial acquisition and vengeance is again stressed.

τὸ: ‘that which’.

τὸ νοέω πρήσσειν: Xerxes seems to make it clear that his mind is already made up. Given his power and, as we later see, tendency to punish severely those who displease him, it is interesting to imagine the feelings of those noblemen invited to the ‘consultation’.

7.8B.1

μέλλω … πατέρα τέν ἐμόν: the simplicity of this sentence makes the expedition sound easy to accomplish, and the concentration here on vengeance and filial piety rather than empire-building adds a moral righteousness to the tone that would be difficult to argue with.

7.8B.2

ἰθύοντα: the idea that Xerxes is taking up and continuing a cherished plan of Darius’ adds validation to his scheme.

οἵ: picking up τὰς Ἀθήνας, but by extension referring to the people within rather than to the city itself.

ἄδικα ποιεῦντες: Darius’ attempt to punish Athens for aiding the Ionian revolt culminated in defeat at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC.

7.8B.3

ἅμα Ἀρισταγόρῃ τῷ Μιλησίῳ: Aristagoras was the tyrant of Miletus in the late sixth and early fifth century BC. In Book 5, Herodotus tells the story of his attempts to persuade the Spartans (unsuccessfully) and Athenians (successfully) to support the Ionian revolt by travelling to those cities carrying a map ‘of the whole world’ engraved upon bronze to support his arguments. In Book 5, Herodotus had told us that in fact Aristagoras himself did not accompany the expedition but stayed in Miletus and appointed two deputies to command it in his place. It adds to the drama to imagine him present in person.

οἷα ἔρξαν … πάντες: the Battle of Marathon. Herodotus makes it seem as though the episode is too painful for Xerxes to refer to directly.

7.8C.1

τοὺς τούτοισι πλησιοχώρους ... οἳ Πέλοπος τοῦ Φρυγὸς νέμονται χώρην: in other words, the aim will be to conquer the Spartans as well as the Athenians.

τῷ Διὸς αἰθέρι ὁμουρέουσαν: to understand Xerxes’ vision, we must visualize the heavens as an upturned bowl meeting the earth at the edges. Thus, if the Persians conquer Greece, their empire will encompass the whole known world and the Persian king will rule the earth as Zeus rules the heavens. Herodotus uses the familiar Greek name Zeus to refer to the god whom Xerxes would have called Ahura Mazda, the god of the Zoroastrian religion. cf 1.131: ‘they call the whole circuit of heaven Zeus, and to him they sacrifice on the highest peaks of the mountains’.

Ahura Mazda was not represented in art during this period but it seems to have been the case that when on expedition the Persian king brought a chariot with him for the god, pulled by sacred white horses. Herodotus mentions in 1.189 an episode in which one of the sacred white horses bolts, although he does not specifically mention that the horses’ job was to pull the chariot of Ahura Mazda. Xenophon mentions the chariot when describing a procession issuing from the royal palace:

‘after them came a chariot sacred to Zeus; it was drawn by white horses and with a yoke of gold and wreathed with garlands’ (Xenophon Cyropaedia 8).

7.8C.2

ἥλιος: as well as being a poetic mode of expression, this reference to the all-seeing sun reminds us that for the Persians the sun was an object of worship.

7.8C.3

οὔτε τινὰ πόλιν ἀνδρῶν οὐδεμίαν οὔτε ἔθνος οὐδὲν ἀνθρώπων: the repeated negatives drive home Xerxes’ point.

οἵ τε … αἴτιοι ... οἵ τε ἀναίτιοι: the blameworthy are the Athenians, upon whom vengeance will be wrought; the rest of the Greeks are innocent, but they will suffer along with the Athenians. The vengeance will take the form of slavery to the Persian empire.

δούλιον ζυγὸν: ‘the yoke of slavery’: we can think of this both literally, as physical shackles binding captured slaves together, and figuratively, as the servitude imposed by the Persian empire on the whole country. These words are and echo of Aeschylus’ play Persians: ζυγὸν ἀμφιβαλεῖν δούλιον Ἑλλάδι (Aeschylus Persians 50). To Greek ears, Xerxes’ speech would sound dangerously hubristic.

7.8D.1

ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ἄν μοι τάδε ποιέοντες χαρίζοισθε: presumably the alternative to being in the king’s favour would be unthinkable: we will find out later in the book the possible punishments awaiting those who displeased Xerxes.

παρεσκευασμένον στρατὸν κάλλιστα: ‘the best-equipped army’ (κάλλιστα is neuter superlative adjective used to express superlative adverb). The offering of such rewards is one of the qualities admired by Xenophon in his encomium of the Spartan king Agesilaus.

ἐν ἡμετέρου: ‘amongst us’.

7.8D.2

ποιητέα: the verbal adjective expressing obligation: ‘these things must be done’.

ἰδιοβουλέειν: a rare verb meaning ‘to follow one’s own advice’, that is, to do what one wants without consulting others.

τίθημι τὸ πρῆγμα ἐς μέσον: literally ‘I place the matter into the middle’ and hence open it up for discussion. This expression calls to mind the democratic and egalitarian practices of the polis, quite antithetical to the way decisions would be made in the court of a despot. Either Herodotus is unthinkingly making Xerxes speak like an Athenian, or he is pointedly showing that, whatever Xerxes might say, the discussion will not actually be open and frank, since, as he says in 7.10, most of those present are too terrified to speak against the proposal.

τὸν βουλόμενον: ‘the one wishing’, so ‘whoever wishes’.

7.9.1

As the first speaker in this ‘debate’, Mardonius agrees sycophantically with Xerxes. He deals first with the question of revenge, pointing out that if it is justifiable to attack other peoples simply in order to enlarge the empire, then how much more necessary must it be to punish aggressors such as the Greeks. He goes on to dismiss the Greeks as credible foes in battle, adducing his own experience (but conveniently omitting to mention the failure of the campaign in which he was involved). Full of exclamation and rhetorical questioning, his speech is confident and daring.

Μαρδόνιος: see note on 7.5.1 above.

τῶν γενομένων Περσέων ἄριστος ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἐσομένων: hyperbolic flattering language.

ἐπίκεο: ‘you have hit the mark’.

Ἴωνας τοὺς ἐν τῇ Εὐρώπῃ κατοικημένους: it is characteristic of Persians to refer to all Greeks as ‘Ionians’. Similarly, the Greeks are referred to in the Old Testament as Yawan, which is cognate with Ionian.

καταγελάσαι: the risk of being laughed at is always a potent argument for ancient Greeks. The Homeric heroes lived in horror of mockery. The story of Ajax, for example, shows us someone who would literally rather die than suffer the mockery of his fellow heroes. The avoidance of this fate is characteristic of other heroic figures throughout Greek literature. For Medea in Euripides’ play, the risk of suffering mockery is a major deciding factor as she wonders whether to kill her children to avenge her treatment by Jason.

7.9.2

Σάκας μὲν καὶ Ἰνδοὺς καὶ Αἰθίοπάς τε καὶ Ἀσσυρίους: Mardonius is exaggerating in that only part of each of these nations was conquered by Persia. Herodotus makes it clear, for example, in Book 3, when outlining the provinces of the Persian empire, that the Persians did not conquer the whole of India, saying ‘these particular Indians live far beyond the reach of the Persians … nor were ever subjects of King Darius’. He also tells us that Cambyses conquered the Ethiopians ‘who border Egypt’.

ἄλλα τε ἔθνεα πολλὰ καὶ μεγάλα: this vague reference enhances the rhetorical effect of Mardonius’ claims about the Persian empire.

καταστρεψάμενοι δούλους ἔχομεν: a harsh but honest representation of the realities of Persian conquest.

ὑπάρξαντας: Mardonius places the blame with the Athenians for opening hostilities by supporting the Ionian revolt.

7.9A.1

τί δείσαντες; κοίην πλήθεος συστροφήν; κοίην δὲ χρημάτων δύναμιν;: the string of rhetorical questions suggesting in the minds of the listener the answers ‘nothing’, ‘no’, and ‘no’ adds to the persuasiveness of Mardonius’ speech.

ἐπιστάμεθα … ἐπιστάμεθα … παῖδας: the repetition of ἐπιστάμεθα and the emphasis on the relationship between the Athenians and subject Greeks in the Persian empire both bolster Mardonius’ point that fighting the Athenians should hold no surprises for the Persians, and that victory will be accomplished easily.

Ἴωνές τε καὶ Αἰολέες καὶ Δωριέες: ‘Ionians and Aeolians and Dorians’: names applied to three of the four ancient tribes (the fourth being the Achaeans) who made up the Greek nation. Mardonius is referring to those Greeks in Asia Minor under Persian rule. Herodotus himself came from Halicarnassus, one of the Dorian cities in what is modern-day Turkey.

7.9A.2

ἐπειρήθην δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς: a reference to the expedition described by Herodotus in Book 6, which resulted in the loss of the fleet off Mount Athos (see note on 7.5.1 above).

ὀλίγον ἀπολιπόντι ἐς αὐτὰς Ἀθήνας: ‘nearly to Athens itself’.

7.9B.1

ἀβουλότατα πολέμους ἵστασθαι ὑπό τε ἀγνωμοσύνης καὶ σκαιότητος: Herodotus continues to place dismissive vocabulary into the mouth of Mardonius to make the Greek opposition seem negligible, enhancing the persuasiveness of his speech.

ἐπεὰν γὰρ ἀλλήλοισι πόλεμον προείπωσι ... μάχονται: a rather crude characterization of Greek methods of warfare, which incidentally ignores the previous defeat of the Persians. Obviously, it would not play into Mardonius’ hands to draw attention to the fact that the Greeks, with their ‘inferior’ methods, had actually conquered the last invading army of Persians.

7.9B.2

τοὺς χρῆν, ἐόντας ὁμογλώσσους … καὶ παντὶ μᾶλλον ἢ μάχῃσι: Herodotus here seems to be expressing his own ideas via the mouthpiece of Mardonius.

7.9C.1

σοὶ δὲ δὴ μέλλει … ἁπάσας;: Mardonius’ rhetorical question increases the effect of the peroration of his speech, and, when combined with the hyperbolic language of πλῆθος τὸ ἐκ τῆς Ἀσίης and νέας τὰς ἁπάσας, makes the Persians seem to be an indefatigable and invincible force.

εἰ δὲ ἄρα ... ἄριστοι τὰ πολέμια: these words add irony to the fact that Mardonius will go on to command the Persian forces defeated on land by the Greeks at Plataea in 479 BC.

ἔστω ... φιλέει γίνεσθαι: these inspiring words fit with what we have read already in chapter 6 about Mardonius’ thrill-seeking nature, and sit less well with what Herodotus has told us in the same chapter about his motivation of personal advancement.

7.10.1

ἐπιλεήνας: the verb, with the root λεαίνω, literally means to smooth over, as of wood or similar. Here, used figuratively to apply to speech, it means to soften or make plausible.

σιωπώντων δὲ … τῇ προκειμένῃ: Herodotus makes it clear that the silence of all the other Persians cannot necessarily be taken as consent. Herodotus’ description of the ‘debate’ among the Persians, in which the king has already made his view clear, and many are too frightened to express an opinion, would have been in complete contrast with the experience of his Athenian audience, for whom free debate was a central part of democratic life.

Artabanus is the only one who dares to make a reply, protected as he is by his age and his status as Xerxes’ uncle. His intervention is characterized by caution, the wisdom born of experience and a reliance on proverbs or philosophical aphorisms, providing an effective contrast with the rash and headstrong Mardonius. His speech is liberally laced with ‘gnomic’ utterances: short, pithy maxims encapsulating universal truths. He begins by highlighting the value of sharing opinions in open debate, likening the process to rubbing gold on a touchstone to assess its purity. He cautions strongly against dismissing the Greeks as a credible enemy in the way that Mardonius has done, and against taking any steps which carry too much risk. Emphasizing the importance of planning and forethought, he further warns against the hubristic actions that bring sure punishment from the gods, and against rushing into things. In a dramatic rhetorical flourish designed to show the strength of his feeling, Artabanus ends his speech by suggesting openly to Mardonius that they make a deal: each will offer his children as security for his side of the bargain. Mardonius will lead the campaign against Greece and if he wins, Artabanus’ children will be put to death. If he loses, his children will die.

7.10A.1

μὴ λεχθεισέων μὲν γνωμέων ἀντιέων ἀλλήλῃσι: the arguing of both sides of an argument was a skill taught in Athens by the sophists, travelling professional (i.e. paid) teachers of rhetoric and philosophy. Artabanus’ opening words highlight the value of a system where there is open debate of policy and decision-making.

ὥσπερ τὸν χρυσὸν … τὸν ἀμείνω: Artabanus is here describing the ancient method of determining the purity of gold and its alloys by rubbing them (παρατρίβω) against a ‘touchstone’, a dark, fine-grained stone, upon which they made a mark: the colour of the mark revealed the relative purity of the metal. The analogy is vivid, and at the same time enables Artabanus to imply that both sides of the argument have great merit: it is simply a matter of determining which is superior.

7.10A.2

πατρὶ τῷ σῷ, ἀδελφεῷ δὲ ἐμῷ, Δαρείῳ: Artabanus emphasizes the familial relationship between himself and Xerxes.

ἠγόρευον μὴ στρατεύεσθαι … ἀγαθοὺς τῆς στρατιῆς ἀποβαλὼν ἀπῆλθε: Artabanus establishes his credentials as an advisor who should be heeded by reference to an earlier episode (4.83) in which Darius ignored his advice not to attack the nomadic Scythians, with disastrous results. The story of the failed expedition is related in Herodotus 4.89–142.

7.10A.3

ἀμείνονας ἢ Σκύθας, οἳ κατὰ θάλασσάν τε ἄριστοι καὶ κατὰ γῆν λέγονται εἶναι: Artabanus contradicts Mardonius’ assurances that the Greek forces will be a negligible enemy.

7.10B.1

ζεύξας: the use of the verb ζεύγνυμι, to join under a yoke, emphasizes the physical nature of the bridging, which was done by means of a pontoon of linked boats, as well as the important figurative idea of the taming of nature.

κατὰ γῆν ἢ καὶ κατὰ θάλασσαν ἑσσωθῆναι, ἢ καὶ κατ᾽ ἀμφότερα: Artabanus repeats this fear from a different point of view a few lines later. By repeatedly emphasizing the twofold nature of the approaching engagements, as well as the skill in both arenas of the enemy, he makes the undertaking seem rash and risky.

ἄλκιμοι: an epic-sounding word emphasizing the heroic bravery of the enemy.

μοῦνοι Ἀθηναῖοι: the Athenians themselves liked to represent this as the case (see Herodotus 9.27). However, Herodotus makes it clear in 6.108 and 111 that the Plataeans played a large part in the defeat of the Persians.

ἀλλ᾽ ἢν τῇσι νηυσὶ ... λύσωσι τὴν γέφυραν: the danger of being cut off if they were defeated and the bridge destroyed before they could re-cross the Hellespont is spelled out.

7.10.C.1

οὐδεμιῇ σοφίῃ οἰκηίῃ: Artabanus again seeks to focus on his experience, which diverts attention from any possible imputation of animus or enmity towards Mardonius personally.

ποταμὸν Ἴστρον: the river known to us as the Danube.

παντοῖοι ἐγένοντο Σκύθαι δεόμενοι Ἰώνων λῦσαι τὸν πόρον: the local tyrants were left guarding the bridge and told to destroy it if Darius had not returned in 60 days: the story is related by Herodotus in 4.136–9.

7.10.C.2

Ἱστιαῖος ὁ Μιλήτου τύραννος: Histiaeus was one of the local rulers (‘tyrants’) who owed their position to Persian patronage. In the episode of the Danube crossing in Book 4, Miltiades, the Athenian tyrant of the Chersonese, speaks in favour of doing what the Scythians say and breaking the bridge. Histiaeus, however, reminds the assembled tyrants that they all owe their positions of power to the Persians and that if Darius is overthrown, they are unlikely to be able to continue to rule their respective cities ‘for all the cities will choose democracy rather than despotism’. After this, Histiaeus became a trusted advisor of Darius, but met a grisly end when he was impaled and beheaded by Artaphernes after having been suspected of contributing to the Ionian revolt (6.30).

καίτοι καὶ λόγῳ … πρήγματα γεγενῆσθαι: Artabanus draws attention to the risks of having to rely on allies who may ultimately prove disloyal.

7.10.D.1

μηδεμιῆς ἀνάγκης ἐούσης: Artabanus’ view is completely opposite to the risk-seeking nature of Mardonius.

τὸν σύλλογον τόνδε διάλυσον: this seems sound advice given the apparently false nature of the ‘debate’.

ὅταν τοι δοκέῃ, προσκεψάμενος ἐπὶ σεωυτοῦ προαγόρευε τά τοι δοκέει εἶναι ἄριστα: Artabanus’ words here, with the repetitive τοι /σεωυτοῦ /τοι, encourage Xerxes to make up his own mind.

7.10.D.2

εὖ βουλεύεσθαι … ὑπὸ τῆς τύχης: in this paragraph Artabanus stresses the importance of relying on reason to plan carefully, even if plans are subsequently thwarted by the action of chance.

βουλεύεσθαι ... βεβούλευται … τὸ βούλευμα … ὁ δὲ βουλευσάμενος ... βεβούλευται τε: the frequent repetition of these cognate words leaves the listener in no doubt as to what Artabanus is advocating.

εὕρημα εὕρηκε: the cognate words here reinforce the idea that this prize is one that is only won by chance.

7.10.E.1

ὡς κεραυνοῖ ὁ θεὸς: Artabanus’ language takes on a dramatic epic quality. The verb is the same used by Hesiod in his Theogony when Zeus defeats the monstrous Typhoeus.

τὰ δὲ σμικρὰ οὐδέν μιν κνίζει: this view, familiar from, for example, the tragedies of Aeschylus, holds that the lives of the humble do not attract the attention of the gods.

ὁρᾷς: the repetition of the verb makes it seem as though Artabanus is describing a self-evident truth.

φιλέει γὰρ ὁ θεὸς τὰ ὑπερέχοντα πάντα κολούειν: Artabanus’ role here is of wise elder adviser stating universal truths in an attempt to warn Xerxes away from the path of overweening ambition and hubris. He is like a one-man tragic chorus.

Cf. Aeschylus Agamemnon ll.375–80: ‘The penalty for reckless crime is ruin when men breathe a spirit of pride above just measure, because their mansions teem with more abundance than is good for them. But let there be such wealth as brings no distress, enough to satisfy a sensible man.’

and ll.469–71:

‘Glory in excess is fraught with peril; the lofty peak is struck by Zeus’ thunderbolt. I choose prosperity unassailed by envy.’

ὁ θεὸς φθονήσας φόβον ἐμβάλῃ: Artabanus refers to the belief that panic in battle (the original Homeric meaning of the word φόβος) was induced by supernatural intervention, just as the voice of the god Pan was supposed to cause cattle to stampede. Note that the participle φθονήσας draws attention to the god’s motivation, namely jealousy.

οὐ γὰρ ἐᾷ φρονέειν μέγα ὁ θεὸς ἄλλον ἢ ἑωυτόν: a typical gnomic utterance from Artabanus in his role as older and wiser giver of advice.

7.10.F.1

ἐπειχθῆναι: the infinitive used as a verbal noun, or gerund = ‘haste’.

φιλέουσι: used to mean ‘usually’ or ‘are likely to’.

ἐν δὲ τῷ ἐπισχεῖν: another gerund, as ἐπειχθῆναι above, this time with the article: ‘in waiting’.

παραυτίκα ... ἀνὰ χρόνον: Artabanus’ approach is summed up in the contrast between seeking instant gratification and waiting for time to tell.

7.10.G.1

σοὶ μὲν δὴ ταῦτα, ὦ βασιλεῦ, συμβουλεύω: the role which Herodotus gives Artabanus here is to offer sage counsel which will then be disregarded by his hot-headed and hubristic nephew.

φλαύρως ἀκούειν: ‘to be ill-spoken of’.

λόγους ματαίους … φλαύρως ἀκούειν … διαβάλλων: ‘idle words … to be spoken ill of … slandering’: Artabanus makes clear his view that Mardonius’ characterization of the Greeks is ignorant and wide of the mark.

ἐπαείρεις αὐτὸν βασιλέα στρατεύεσθαι: this is indeed what Herodotus has shown happening in the earlier passage.

μή νυν οὕτω γένηται: the suddenly contrasting short sentence adds impact to the sentiment.

7.10.G.2

διαβολὴ γὰρ ἐστὶ δεινότατον: Herodotus continues to characterize Artabanus as a wise commentator on human affairs: he turns now to an exposition of the iniquities of slander, explaining the widespread negative impact of making false accusations. The one making the accusation and the one who believes it are both to blame, and the victim is wronged twice over in consequence.

ἀδικέοντες … ἀδικεόμενος … ἀδικέει … ἀδικέει … ἀδικέεται: the saturation of the passage with the verb ἀδικέω drives home to the audience that slander is wrong and injurious.

οὐ παρεόντος … ἀπεὼν: Artabanus emphasizes the inability of those slandered in their absence (such as the Greeks in this instance) to defend themselves.

7.10.H.1

στρατηλάτεε αὐτὸς σὺ ἐπιλεξάμενός τε ἄνδρας τοὺς ἐθέλεις: this is in fact what eventually happens after the defeat at Salamis, when Xerxes returns home and Mardonius remains behind with a view to the eventual conquest of Greece.

7.10.H.2

κτεινέσθων οἱ ἐμοὶ παῖδες, πρὸς δὲ αὐτοῖσι καὶ ἐγώ: this offer is intended to show Artabanus’ passionate belief in his point of view. Xerxes, however, is enraged and utterly rejects Artabanus’ advice.

ἐμοὶ … σοὶ: possessive datives: ‘my sons … and yours’.

κτεινέσθων … πασχόντων: third person imperatives: ‘let them be killed’ and ‘let them suffer’.

The balance and contrast in these phrases draws attention to the bargain Artabanus is suggesting.

ἢν ἀπονοστήσῃς: ‘if you return’: the implication being that he won’t. And, indeed, he doesn’t.

7.10.H.3

ἀνάξεις: ‘you will lead by sea’.

ὑπὸ κυνῶν τε καὶ ὀρνίθων διαφορεύμενον: leaving a corpse unburied to be devoured by dogs and birds was anathema to the Greeks and is a fate often threatened for each other by warriors in the Iliad before single combat. Herodotus makes Artabanus speak like a Greek, forgetting, or unaware, that this form of burial was, and is, usual in Zoroastrianism.

γνόντα ἐπ᾽ οἵους ἄνδρας ἀναγινώσκεις στρατεύεσθαι βασιλέα: in Book 9, Herodotus shows Mardonius continuing to underestimate the opposition mounted by the Lacedaemonians, as well as showing a disregard for oracles. He was killed at the Battle of Plataea, after, Herodotus tells us, proving to be the most courageous individual among the Persians. According to Herodotus, the eventual site of his burial was a mystery.

Chapters 11–33: Xerxes changes his mind and decides not to invade, but then has a recurring dream which threatens ruin unless he invades Greece. Artabanus, forced by Xerxes to sleep in his bed, also has the same dream, and so the decision is taken to proceed with the invasion. Preparation for war takes four years, and then the expeditionary force sets off from Cappodocia to Sardis.

7.34

τὴν μὲν … τὴν δ᾽ ἑτέρην: referring to two separate bridges. Xerxes bridged the narrow crossing between Abydus and Sestus, famous from mythology as the scene of the nightly swim of Leander to visit Hero, later emulated by Lord Byron.

λευκολίνου … βυβλίνην: although it is not immediately clear from this description, the white flax and papyrus are not used to make the entire bridge, but, manufactured into rope, to tie together the boats used to form a pontoon bridge.

ἑπτὰ στάδιοι: the stadion, or stade, was an ancient Greek unit of measurement of distance. There does not seem to have been one clearly defined standard length for a stade, but various different measurements depending on region, varying from about 150 to 200 metres. The stadion race was the premier event at the ancient Olympic Games, the original track measuring approximately 190 metres.

χειμὼν μέγας: the storm that destroys the original bridges could be regarded as a divine warning, which Xerxes fails to heed.

7.35.1

τριηκοσίας ἐπικέσθαι μάστιγι πληγὰς καὶ κατεῖναι ἐς τὸ πέλαγος πεδέων ζεῦγος: one of the most famous episodes in Herodotus’ description of Xerxes, this seems to confirm the view of the Persian king as a deranged despot. It is possible, however, that Herodotus misunderstood the scene and may have taken a figurative reference to binding or fettering the sea, referring to the building of bridges over it, too literally. Cf. Aeschylus’ Persians 745ff.: ‘for he conceived the hope that he could by shackles, as if it were a slave, restrain the current of the sacred Hellespont, the Bosporus, a stream divine; he set himself to fashion a roadway of a new type, and, by casting upon it hammer-wrought fetters, made a spacious causeway for his mighty host.’

Even if Xerxes did take such action, it is not necessarily as maniacal as it first seems. Plenty of ancient, and less ancient, legal codes allow for the punishment of animals and inanimate objects: Aristotle’s Athenaion Politeia mentions that this was the case in Athens, and Pausanias includes a number of stories of, for example, statues being punished for accidentally causing death.

στίξοντας: branding was a customary punishment for runaway slaves, so seems appropriate for the recalcitrant, disobedient Hellespont, but it is really quite hard to see how this might have been achieved.

7.35.2

βάρβαρά τε καὶ ἀτάσθαλα: Herodotus seems genuinely outraged at the Persian king’s sacrilegious treatment of a divine waterway.

Ὦ πικρὸν ὕδωρ: the direct speech adds a moment of drama to the narrative.

βασιλεὺς μὲν Ξέρξης διαβήσεταί σε, ἤν τε σύ γε βούλῃ ἤν τε μή: further demonstration of Xerxes’ hubris.

θολερῷ καὶ ἁλμυρῷ ποταμῷ: ‘a turbid and briny river’: the Hellespont is in fact not a river at all, although its long winding shape may give that impression. Addressing it in this manner demeans it further – not only does it not count as part of the sea, its muddy, salty waters make it useless as a river, which needs to be clear and pure to be a viable source of water. cf. the River Borysthenes, 4.53: πίνεσθαι τε ἥδιστος ἐστί, ῥέει τε καθαρὸς: ‘it is very sweet to drink and flows pure’.

οὐδεὶς ἀνθρώπων θύει: unlike, for example, the River Strymon, to which the Magi did sacrifice.

7.35.3

ἀποταμεῖν τὰς κεφαλάς: in Book 9, Herodotus again shows Xerxes summarily executing those who have displeased him during the Battle of Salamis. Beheading, however, was not a dishonourable death for the Persians: mutilation by cutting off the nose and ears, as happens to Zopyrus in Book 3, seems a more likely humiliation for those incurring the king’s displeasure.

7.38.1

Πύθιος ὁ Λυδὸς: the same character who offered Xerxes his fortune in chapters 27–9: see the overview of the prescription in the introduction.

καταρρωδήσας τὸ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ φάσμα: the eclipse of the sun has terrified Pythius, despite the positive interpretation placed upon it by the Magi.

ἐπαρθείς τε τοῖσι δωρήμασι,: ‘raised up’; ‘encouraged’; ‘puffed up’: the verb is often used in circumstances where the person is falsely encouraged or his pride is unfounded. Here Pythius is deluded into thinking that the formalized exchange of gifts and official friendship received in 7.29 entitle him to special treatment from the king. The same verb is used of Mardonius in 9.49.

7.38.2

τὸ σοὶ μὲν ἐλαφρὸν … ἐμοὶ δὲ μέγα …: τὸ here is an example of the use of the article to stand for a relative pronoun, ‘which’. The contrast between σοὶ and ἐμοὶ and between ἐλαφρὸν and μέγα draws attention to the distance between Pythius and Xerxes: it seems a small favour to ask from one who has so much. Pythius is badly misjudging the situation, unfortunately.

θαρσήσας: Xerxes’ apparently encouraging response emboldens Pythius to make his request.

7.38.3

ἐς τόδε ἡλικίης: Pythius is said in 7.27 to be the son of Atys, making him the grandson of Croesus. This would mean that he was 70 or 80 years old by this time, an advanced age.

τὸν πρεσβύτατον: if Pythius is 70 or 80, his eldest son would himself not be especially young.

νοστήσειας: optative: ‘may you return’.

7.39.1

κάρτα τε ἐθυμώθη: we are by now becoming used to Xerxes’ extreme and unpredictable reactions. He is outraged to think that Pythius should dare to ask for special treatment when he himself is leading an army, which contains many of his own relatives and friends.

παῖδας ἐμοὺς καὶ ἀδελφεοὺς καὶ οἰκηίους καὶ φίλους: the polysyndetic list gives rhetorical emphasis to Xerxes’ point: why should Pythius be given special treatment when Xerxes himself is risking so much personally?

ἐὼν ἐμὸς δοῦλος: a stark reminder of the realities of their relationship: see ἐπαερθείς above.

πανοικίῃ αὐτῇ τῇ γυναικὶ: αὐτῇ τῇ γυναικὶ seems superfluous, but again serves to emphasize Xerxes’ complete control over his subjects: if he says bring your wife, you bring your wife.

ὡς ἐν τοῖσι ὠσὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων οἰκέει ὁ θυμός: this has the sound of a well-known maxim or proverb.

ὃς χρηστὰ μὲν ἀκούσας τέρψιος ἐμπιπλεῖ τὸ σῶμα, ὑπεναντία δὲ τούτοισι ἀκούσας ἀνοιδέει: whether or not this is a proverbial truth, it certainly describes Xerxes’ own behaviour.

7.39.2

ἐλάσσω δὲ τῆς ἀξίης: in view of the punishment Xerxes goes on to inflict, this claim to leniency seems rather hollow.

τὰ ξείνια: the ancient and powerful concept of xenia, familiar from Homer, whereby strangers are welcomed without question, and gifts exchanged, on the understanding that a reciprocal relationship pertains wherever civilized life exists.

τοῦ περιέχεαι μάλιστα: a peculiarly tyrannical twist: it shall be the son Pythius most especially desires to keep that he shall lose.

7.39.3

Herodotus tells a story in Book 4 about Darius exacting a similar punishment: the Persian Oeobazus, a father of three sons serving in Darius’ army, asks that one be left behind. Darius tells him that in fact he will leave all his sons behind, but fails to mention that they will be left behind dead.

διαταμόντας … διεξιέναι τὸν στρατόν: a peculiarly horrific image, and one that, given the size of Xerxes’ army, seems on the face of it practically very difficult to achieve in anything other than a symbolic sense. There is, however, evidence that the cutting in half of a sacrificial victim, and the walking between the two halves, conferred a protection upon those who practised the ritual: cf. Jeremiah 34.18–19.

Some argue that the whole of this passage is merely legendary, but even if that is the case, it is worth considering why a legend of this sort might attach itself to Xerxes: clearly for Herodotus, such behaviour was consistent with what he believed to be the character of Xerxes, as well as being typical of Eastern despots.

διαταμεῖν, διαταμόντας δὲ τὰ ἡμίτομα διαθεῖναι τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ δεξιὰ τῆς ὁδοῦ, τὸ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά: the repetitive language here dwells on the true horror of the situation described. The juxtaposition of διαταμεῖν, διαταμόντας suggests the immediate carrying out of the order, while the echoed prefix on διαθεῖναι drives home that the two halves of the body are placed separately, further spelled out by τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ δεξιὰ, τὸ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά.

Chapters 40–4: Herodotus describes the organization of the army and the escort that surrounded the king. In front of Xerxes travelled the ‘sacred chariot of Zeus [that is presumably Ahura Mazda]’, followed by Xerxes himself in a chariot. Herodotus tells us that Xerxes sometimes swapped the chariot for a carriage. He describes the spearmen following behind Xerxes: some had golden or silver pomegranates instead of spikes on the butts of their spears; those immediately behind Xerxes had golden apples. Then came 10,000 cavalry and the rest of the army behind them. We are told the route of the army from Lydia; they encounter violent storms on the foothills of Mount Ida, resulting in a substantial number of casualties. The expedition arrives at, and drinks dry, the River Scamander. Xerxes visits the site of Ilium and makes sacrifices. Unspecified terror seizes the whole army during the night. Xerxes reaches Abydus and reviews the army from a dais of white stone. A sailing race is held.

7.45.1

ὁ Ξέρξης ἑωυτὸν ἐμακάρισε, μετὰ δὲ τοῦτο ἐδάκρυσε: Herodotus does not always include the article with Xerxes’ name. The inclusion here draws additional attention to the king and his emotions. Contrast this scene with Darius’ similar review in Book 4.85–8, where there is no such philosophical or emotional response. In part at least this reaction seems in keeping with Xerxes’ volatile nature as portrayed by Herodotus.

7.46.1

Ἀρτάβανος ὁ πάτρως: Xerxes’ uncle Artabanus is reintroduced as a convenient sounding board and contrast to the character of the king. We must surely regard this entire exchange as fantasy on the part of Herodotus, and moreover one perhaps inspired by theatrical performances or epic verse. The whole scene works well if envisaged as a staged dialogue, and the language used throughout falls within the poetic register.

οὐ συμβουλεύων: ‘advising you not …’ (rather than ‘not advising you …’).

μακαρίσας γὰρ σεωυτὸν δακρύεις: the near-exact repetition of the words from the end of the previous chapter sets up the theme of the exchange, as well as echoing the formulaic nature of epic poetry. The conversation is placed in the realm of poetry or drama rather than reality.

7.46.2

ὁ δὲ: the standard method of showing a change of subject: ‘And he … (Xerxes …)’.

ἐς ἑκατοστὸν ἔτος: ‘a hundred years from now’ rather than ‘to his (each individual’s) hundredth year’.

Ἕτερα τούτου … οἰκτρότερα: Artabanus suggests that there are worse things than death.

παρὰ τὴν ζόην: ‘during life’.

7.46.3

τεθνάναι βούλεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ ζώειν: Herodotus seems receptive to the possibility that death can provide a release and a blessing. In the story of Croesus and Solon in Book 1, Herodotus has Solon tell the story of Cleobis and Biton, two pious young men whose mother asked Hera to bestow on them the greatest blessing possible for the gods to grant, whereupon they fell asleep in the temple and never woke up. ‘A divinely authored proof’, says Herodotus, ‘that it is better to be dead than alive’.

αἵ τε γὰρ συμφοραὶ … τὸν βίον: Herodotus has Artabanus strike a mournful tone: life is short, but then often so filled with suffering as to appear too long.

7.46.4

ὁ δὲ θεὸς γλυκὺν γεύσας τὸν αἰῶνα φθονερὸς ἐν αὐτῷ εὑρίσκεται ἐών: this seems a characteristically Greek view. Artabanus again here sounds like the chorus in a Greek tragedy, claiming that the gods spitefully allow humans a brief idea of how pleasant life could be before jealously snatching it away again. Commentators agree that this is not how a worshipper of Ahura Mazda, viewed as wholly benevolent, would have viewed human life.

7.47.1

Ξέρξης δὲ ἀμείβετο λέγων: ‘Xerxes said in reply’: another epic-sounding formulation. The epic/heroic/poetic sound of the passage is further enhanced by the inclusion of the poetic word βιοτῆς instead of the more usual prose βίος.

μηδὲ κακῶν μεμνώμεθα χρηστὰ ἔχοντες πρήγματα ἐν χερσί: Xerxes’ mood swings again. From tears at the brevity and suffering of human life, he turns to rebuking Artabanus for sympathizing with his melancholy and urges instead a concentration on the short term.

εἴ τοι ἡ ὄψις τοῦ ἐνυπνίου μὴ ἐναργὴς οὕτω ἐφάνη: a reference to the dream which appeared first to Xerxes and subsequently to Artabanus. The story is told by Herodotus in 7.12–18 (see the overview in the introduction). Although Xerxes forced Artabanus to look for the vision at the time, here he is asking him to lay aside any thought of divine intervention and give an honest assessment of the expedition and its chances.

φέρε τοῦτό μοι ἀτρεκέως εἰπέ: as has been previously noted, only Artabanus’ age and status allowed him to speak freely to Xerxes, and even then it must have taken courage.

7.47.2

ὁ δὲ ἀμείβετο λέγων: the heroic-sounding exchange, couched in formulaic epic style, continues.

τελευτήσειε: the optative expressing a wish for the future: ‘would that …’, ‘may …’

οὐδ᾽ ἐντὸς ἐμεωυτοῦ: ‘not within myself’: we might say ‘beside myself’.

ὁρῶν τοι δύο τὰ μέγιστα πάντων ἐόντα πολεμιώτατα: ‘seeing that the two greatest things in existence are your bitterest enemies’: Artabanus explains this initially cryptic utterance in response to Xerxes’ questioning below.

7.48.1

Δαιμόνιε ἀνδρῶν: δαιμόνιος properly means ‘belonging to a δαίμων’ or spirit, therefore miraculous or marvellous. It is used as a polite greeting in Homer simply to mean ‘good sir/lady’, ‘my good man/woman’, with the qualifying ἀνδρῶν added later. It’s possible that Xerxes is simply saying ‘my dear man’, but also that he means something more like ‘you strange man’. Xerxes is completely puzzled by what Artabanus has said and fires a series of questions at him in an attempt to understand.

κότερά τοι ὁ πεζὸς … συναμφότερα ταῦτα: the questions present Xerxes as only able to interpret Artabanus’ words in prosaic, practical terms: does he mean that the Greek army will be bigger, or the Greek navy, or both?

7.49.1

ἢν δὲ πλεῦνας συλλέξῃς, τὰ δύο τοι τὰ λέγω πολλῷ ἔτι πολεμιώτερα γίνεται: in reassuring Xerxes that his forces are not too small, Artabanus hints that they may in fact be too large, and at least that there would be no advantage in making them any bigger.

τὰ δὲ δύο ταῦτα ἐστὶ γῆ τε καὶ θάλασσα: after the cryptic talk, Artabanus lays out simply and clearly what he is driving at: the two enemies he was referring to are the land and the sea.

7.49.2

οὔτε: the οὔτε is not picked up by another οὔτε but by καὶ δὴ in 7.49.3.

ἐγειρομένου χειμῶνος: the memory of the fleet lost rounding Mount Athos is the unspoken reference of this passage.

διασῶσαι: the intensifying δια- prefix adds to the notion of salvation.

οὐκὶ ἕνα … ἀλλὰ παρὰ πᾶσαν τὴν ἤπειρον: this whole passage carries the implication that the fleet is already so large as to be a danger to the expedition rather than an advantage.

7.49.3

λιμὴν ... δεξάμενός ... λιμένων ὑποδεξίων: the polyptoton of λιμὴν and repetition of cognates of δέχομαι sow anxiety about the availability of harbours large enough to take in the whole fleet.

αἱ συμφοραὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἄρχουσι καὶ οὐκὶ ὥνθρωποι τῶν συμφορέων: ‘events rule men and not men events’: clearly a proverbial, gnomic saying, carefully and chiastically expressed, further enhancing the representation of Artabanus as a purveyor of home truths and timeless wisdom.

καὶ δὴ τῶν δύο τοι τοῦ ἑτέρου εἰρημένου τὸ ἕτερον ἔρχομαι ἐρέων: this seems a long-winded way of saying that Artabanus is moving on to his second ‘enemy’. The repetition of τοῦ ἑτέρου …τὸ ἕτερον and ε/ρ sounds adds a ponderous quality to the speech that demands attention.

7.49.4

εἰ θέλει … προβαίνῃς ἑκαστέρω: Artabanus describes a paradoxical situation whereby the less an invading army is opposed by the enemy, the more the land itself becomes the enemy, as they continue to advance into the unknown at the risk of running out of supplies.

τὸ πρόσω αἰεὶ κλεπτόμενος: interpretations of this phrase vary according to whether κλεπτόμενος is taken to be passive or middle. So either ‘being drawn on’ or ‘snatching after more’.

εὐπρηξίης δὲ οὐκ ἔστι ἀνθρώποισι οὐδεμία πληθώρη: another truism from Artabanus: ‘men can never have enough success’.

7.49.5

οὐδενὸς ἐναντιευμένου: Artabanus reintroduces the paradox mentioned above; it is the very fact that no-one opposes conquest that makes it dangerous, because it allows the invading army to overreach itself.

χώρην πλεῦνα ἐν πλέονι χρόνῳ: a pleasing chiastic arrangement of words, enhanced by the repeated consonantal sounds, emphasizing the key considerations of the acquisition of a lot of land over much time.

λιμὸν: Artabanus is taking the bleakest view of the possible outcomes.

ἀνὴρ δὲ οὕτω ἂν εἴη ἄριστος …: Herodotus puts another piece of proverbial wisdom into Artabanus’ mouth: caution in planning and looking for every eventuality leads to boldness in action when the time finally comes.

βουλευόμενος … ἐν δὲ τῷ ἔργῳ; ἀρρωδέοι … θρασὺς: the contrasting pairings of words between planning and action, and fear and boldness, give the speech a rhetorical flourish to finish with.

Artabanus is proved right in the long term: Xerxes’ navy is severely damaged by storms (7.188 and 8.12) and after the defeat at Salamis the retreating army is forced to eat grass, leaves and tree bark (8.115.2–3). Herodotus, with the benefit of hindsight, is able to create in Artabanus a tragic prophet of doom, whose words, however wise, are fated to be ignored. The string of maxims which Herodotus makes him utter enhances the effect noticed earlier of the one-man tragic chorus or Cassandra/Teiresias-type figure, only proved right after the event.

7.50.1

Herodotus continues to present the philosophical, measured and reflective side of Xerxes in his reply, as well as giving him reasonable and persuasive answers to Artabanus’ concerns. The overall thrust of Xerxes’ argument, counter to Artabanus’ anxious consideration of every possible negative eventuality, is that it is better to make a bold and daring attempt than to waste away imagining the worst. As evidence, he adduces the expansion of the Persian empire, a success enjoyed by his predecessors because of their willingness to risk all. More practically, and optimistically, he argues that the army won’t be in Europe long enough to starve: not only will they take sufficient supplies with them, they confidently expect to have access to the crops grown by those they are going to subdue.

οἰκότως: a measured term acknowledging the good sense of what Artabanus has said.

ἀτὰρ: a stronger alternative for δέ to answer the μὲν.

μήτε πάντα φοβέο μήτε πᾶν ὁμοίως ἐπιλέγεο: the repeated μήτε and imperative verbs show Xerxes’ emphatic rejection of his uncle’s point of view on this occasion.

εἰ γὰρ δὴ βούλοιο ἐπὶ τῷ αἰεὶ ἐπεσφερομένῳ πρήγματι τὸ πᾶν ὁμοίως ἐπιλέγεσθαι, ποιήσειας ἂν οὐδαμὰ οὐδέν: a direct rebuttal of Artabanus’ comment in the previous chapter that the best kind of man is he who feels alarm at the thought of everything that might go wrong. Xerxes’ view is that if you spend all your time thinking about possible eventualities, you’ll never do anything at all, a point emphasized by the repeated negatives at the end of this sentence.

κρέσσον δὲ πάντα θαρσέοντα ἥμισυ τῶν δεινῶν πάσχειν μᾶλλον ἢ πᾶν χρῆμα προδειμαίνοντα μηδαμὰ μηδὲν παθεῖν: ‘it is better to approach everything boldly and suffer half of what you fear than to fear everything and never suffer anything’: Xerxes shows that he can match Artabanus cliché for cliché. The repetitious μηδαμὰ μηδὲν directly echoes the οὐδαμὰ οὐδέν above, helping to reinforce Xerxes’ argument that nothing ventured is nothing gained.

7.50.2

ἐρίξων: the verb, connected with ἔρις, strife, is used of wrangling or verbal disputation. Xerxes is characterizing his uncle here as one who has negative arguments to offer against everything others say, but nothing positive to offer in return.

σφάλλεσθαι: a vivid verb that can mean to be physically thrown off one’s feet as well as, as here, to be foiled in an argument. One senses that Herodotus wishes to portray Xerxes as rather enjoying playing the devil-may-care hero to his staid, overly cautious uncle.

τοῖσι τοίνυν βουλομένοισι ποιέειν ὡς τὸ ἐπίπαν φιλέει γίνεσθαι τὰ κέρδεα, τοῖσι δὲ ἐπιλεγομένοισί τε πάντα καὶ ὀκνέουσι οὐ μάλα ἐθέλει: Xerxes is amassing his own collection of maxims to support his side of the argument: this could be loosely translated as ‘he who dares wins’.

ἐθέλει: this use of ἐθέλει means to be naturally disposed, wont or accustomed.

Xerxes’ claim, unlike Artabanus’, is not supported by the account. The successful military actions carried out by Xerxes’ predecessors were endorsed by his advisers, but Croesus, Cyrus, Cambyses and Darius might not have been defeated if they had listened to those cautioning them.

7.50.3

τὰ Περσέων πρήγματα: ‘Persian affairs’: almost just = ‘Persia’.

ἐς ὃ δυνάμιος: ‘To what of power’, that is, ‘to what power’ or ‘to what position of power’. Notice the characteristic Greek formulation whereby the subject of the subordinate clause is made the object of the main verb. ‘You see Persian affairs, to what power they have come’, meaning, ‘You see to what position of power Persia has come’.

γνώμῃσι ἐχρέωντο … εἶχον τοιούτους: Xerxes makes what seems perhaps to be a rather pointed distinction between holding opinions like Artabanus’, and not holding such opinions oneself, but having advisers who do. His argument is that if his predecessors had listened to advisers cautioning them in the way that Artabanus is attempting to caution him, they would never have achieved the successes they enjoyed.

κινδύνους ἀναρριπτέοντες: the metaphor is taken from playing dice.

μεγάλα γὰρ πρήγματα μεγάλοισι κινδύνοισι ἐθέλει καταιρέεσθαι: for the use of ἐθέλει, see 7.50.2 above. καταιρέεσθαι is passive of καθαιρέω, to take down, meaning ‘to achieve’, ‘to win as a reward or prize’. Xerxes is proving that he is a match for Artabanus when it comes to finding proverbs to support his enterprise. Many of them sound familiar even to modern ears.

7.50.4

πᾶσαν τὴν Εὐρώπην: Xerxes is seeming to become more confident as he speaks – the object of the expedition is here stated as the conquest of the whole of Europe, as previously favoured by Mardonius.

οὔτε λιμῷ ἐντυχόντες οὐδαμόθι οὔτε ἄλλο ἄχαρι οὐδὲν παθόντες: the repetition of negatives serves effectively to reject all Artabanus’ objections.

ἐπ᾽ ἀροτῆρας δὲ καὶ οὐ νομάδας στρατευόμεθα ἄνδρας: Xerxes dismisses Artabanus’ fear of famine by pointing out that they will be conquering cultivated land so will be able to feed the army from the crops: the reference to nomads seems to be a direct reference to the disastrous Scythian campaign of Darius, brought forward as an argument against the expedition by Artabanus in 7.10.

7.51.1

σὺ δέ μευ συμβουλίην ἔνδεξαι: the δέ here imparts a special emphasis to this part of the sentence, rather than changing the subject as is often the case.

περὶ πολλῶν πρηγμάτων πλεῦνα: the alliteration helps stress the momentous nature of the deliberations.

Ἰωνίην: an ethnographic rather than geographic term.

πλὴν Ἀθηναίων: Athens claimed to be the mother-city of the Ionian race.

7.51.2

ἢ γὰρ σφέας, ἢν ἕπωνται, δεῖ ἀδικωτάτους γίνεσθαι καταδουλουμένους τὴν μητρόπολιν, ἢ δικαιοτάτους συνελευθεροῦντας: Artabanus cautions against involving the Ionian Greeks in the campaign, since it will strain their possibly doubtful loyalty to their Persian overlords. Artabanus appears to acknowledge the justice of the Ionians’ case in not wishing to fight against Athens and speaks here like an Athenian, indeed exactly like the letter Herodotus tells us was written by Themistocles to the Ionian Greeks (8.22): ‘Men of Ionia. What you are doing by making war against the land of your ancestors and enslaving Greece is a criminal act.’

7.51.3

ἀδικωτάτους … καταδουλουμένους … δικαιοτάτους συνελευθεροῦντας. ἀδικώτατοι … οὐδὲν κέρδος μέγα … δικαιότατοι … δηλήσασθαι μεγάλως …: the balance and contrast here neatly encapsulate the paradox. If the Ionians behave unjustly (towards Athens by helping the Persians) they won’t be much help to the Persians anyway; if they behave justly (towards Athens by seeking to liberate her from potential Persian domination) they might cause the Persian army a lot of trouble.

τὸ παλαιὸν ἔπος ὡς εὖ εἴρηται: Artabanus rounds off the exchange by openly acknowledging his debt to ancient proverbial wisdom and closing his speech with another saying: τὸ μὴ ἅμα ἀρχῇ πᾶν τέλος καταφαίνεσθαι: ‘the end is not revealed completely at the beginning’. For Artabanus, at least as characterized by Herodotus, these sayings transmit universal truths, learned through long experience. Inconveniently for him, it is characteristic of proverbs that one can always find a contradictory example, something that Xerxes uses to his advantage in this conversation.

7.52.1

τῶν ἀπεφήναο γνωμέων σφάλλεαι: clearly if Artabanus was hoping to clinch the argument with his fears about the loyalty of the Ionians, he was mistaken. Xerxes is at a peak of self-confidence and seems to have an answer for every anxiety.

δικαιοσύνην καὶ πιστότητα ἐνέδωκαν, ἄχαρι δὲ οὐδέν: Xerxes’ argument is on shaky ground. Herodotus has already explained in 7.10 how close the Persian army came to disaster in the episode of Histiaeus and the bridge over the Danube. Perhaps Herodotus puts this trusting speech into the mouth of Xerxes to show his naivety as a new king not yet embittered by experience.

7.52.2

τέκνα καὶ γυναῖκας καὶ χρήματα: the fact that the Ionians have left behind children, wives and possessions suggests more strongly than anything else that they plan to remain loyal.

νεώτερόν τι: literally ‘something newer/rather new’, but the standard way of expressing ‘rebellion’ or ‘revolution’.

σῶζε οἶκόν τε τὸν ἐμὸν καὶ τυραννίδα τὴν ἐμήν· σοὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ μούνῳ ἐκ πάντων σκῆπτρα τὰ ἐμὰ ἐπιτρέπω: Artabanus is despatched to Susa to mind affairs while the king is away. This is a dramatic and public conferring by Xerxes of the powers of regent, using poetic language (σκῆπτρα). Xerxes emphasizes his hold on power by the repetition of τὸν ἐμὸν … τὴν ἐμήν … τὰ ἐμὰ but entrusts all to his uncle. We can imagine our fantasy stage scene concluding with a flourish at this point, with the physical handing over perhaps of the sceptre as a concrete symbol of Artabanus’ status.

This exchange, culminating in the Xerxes’ honourable despatch of Artabanus, seems to mark a new stage in the king’s self-confidence: he is not cowed by his uncle, but neither does he petulantly fly into a rage. Instead, he is reasonable, if bolder than the older man, and knows his own mind. The sending of Artabanus back to Susa seems to mark the moment at which Xerxes no longer feels the need of advice or guidance from his elders.

Chapters 53–100: After sending Artabanus away to Susa, Xerxes exhorts the leading Persians to pursue the war vigorously. They prepare sacrifices and the crossing of the Hellespont begins. It takes seven days and seven nights. Meanwhile the fleet sails towards Cape Sarpedon. At Doriscos, Xerxes decides to hold a review of all his forces. Chapters 61–100 comprise a description of the various contingents of the land and naval forces. As chapter 101 begins, Xerxes has just completed a review of the army and the navy, riding in his chariot between the ranks of the soldiers and sailing in a boat between the ships’ prows and the shore.

7.101.1

Δημάρητον τὸν Ἀρίστωνος: this is the same Demaratus was mentioned in 7.3, where he was offering advice on the succession. See the overview of the prescribed texts in the introduction. Herodotus once again introduces him as a trusted adviser, setting up the exchange between him and Xerxes to reveal the king’s ultimate ignorance of the enemy he is planning to attack.

πόλιος οὔτ᾽ ἐλαχίστης οὔτ᾽ ἀσθενεστάτης: this is Sparta, and the Persians have learned the hard way that it is not to be underestimated. In 7.133, Herodotus explains that when Darius sent heralds to demand the earth and water that betokened surrender, the heralds were thrown into a pit and a well and told to get the earth and water from there. Xerxes, following the review of his vast armament, is portrayed by Herodotus as being in confident mood, yet with residual doubt, summoning the Spartan Demaratus in order to get him to admit that the Persian army is now invincible, even by his fearsome former countrymen.

Herodotus repeatedly emphasizes the proud freedom of the Spartans: in 7.135, the Persian governor Hydarnes entertains two nobly born Spartiates who are on their way to offer themselves as sacrificial tribute in recompense for the murdered heralds and asks them why the Lacedaemonians spurn the king’s friendship. They reply proudly: ‘Hydarnes, this advice you are giving us is not balanced; part of it rests on experience, part on ignorance. For you know very well how to be a slave, but you have not had experience of freedom.’

7.101.2

εἰ Ἕλληνες ὑπομενέουσι χεῖρας ἐμοὶ ἀνταειρόμενοι: Xerxes asks this question and immediately provides his own answer: οὐ γάρ, ὡς ἐγὼ δοκέω.

οὐ … οὐδ᾽ … οὐκ: the repeated negatives give the effect of Xerxes trying to convince himself that what he says is true.

μὴ ἐόντες ἄρθμιοι: the participle here is used to express a conditional: ‘unless they are united’. In fact, the Greeks weren’t united, as Herodotus points out at 7.138: ‘No matter that the Greeks themselves had long been aware of this, there was a complete lack of consensus as to how they should respond.’ However, they still manage to defeat Xerxes.

7.101.3

βασιλεῦ, κότερα ἀληθείῃ χρήσωμαι πρὸς σὲ ἢ ἡδονῇ;: a nice Laconic response and one which bears out Herodotus’ characterization of the Spartans as fearless and proud.

ὁ δέ μιν ἀληθείῃ χρήσασθαι ἐκέλευε: Xerxes, echoing Demaratus’ words directly, demands the truth, but we see as the conversation unfolds that he doesn’t like what he hears.

7.102.1

ἐπειδὴ ἀληθείῃ διαχρήσασθαι πάντως κελεύεις …: the word ἀληθείῃ is picked up and thrown between the two speakers like a ball. Demaratus is talking here about the current situation, but Herodotus has already mentioned when discussing Persian customs in 1.138: ‘The worst offence of all that a man can commit, they think, is to tell a lie …’. The Behistun inscription in which Darius records the events of his reign sets him up in opposition to ‘The Lie’ and urges future kings to punish anyone who is a ‘Lie-follower’.

σύντροφος: ‘congenital’. Contrasted with ἔπακτος (acquired) in the balancing phrase: poverty (πενίη) is endemic, but courage (ἀρετὴ) is acquired. This is achieved through σοφίης … καὶ νόμου ἰσχυροῦ ‘wisdom and tough law’. Thucydides expresses a similar idea at 1.123: πάτριον γὰρ ὑμῖν ἐκ τῶν πόνων τὰς ἀρετὰς κτᾶσθαι. Demaratus outlines the conditions through which Spartans have attained their legendary bravery, and which were maintained purposely under the system of Spartan education. The sentence comes full circle, with the claim that this acquired ἀρετὴ is used to ward off both poverty and tyranny. There is perhaps a slight paradox in this claim, since at the beginning of the sentence poverty has been described as endemic, but the sentence is rhetorically neat.

καὶ τὴν δεσποσύνην: the καὶ and the placement at the end of the sentence draw attention to this phrase, which must be regarded as pointed when used in conversation with the King of Persia.

7.102.2

αἰνέω μέν νυν: Herodotus puts into Demaratus’ mouth a eulogy of the Spartans. It is hard to think of Demaratus here as a disgruntled deposed king in the court of an enemy power, such is the admiration and affection he feels for his native land and people. The circumstances of his own life do not appear to have dimmed his ardour for Spartan values: his experiences of living under Persian kings have perhaps, if anything, strengthened his admiration for the tough regime under which he grew up. If we presume, as we must, that the Demaratus we see here and the words he speaks are a Herodotean construct, written with the benefit of hindsight, then Herodotus creates this scene to highlight Xerxes’ ultimate ignorance about the country he plans to conquer, as well as to laud the Spartan bravery that contributed to his defeat.

πρῶτα μὲν … αὖτις δὲ: Demaratus constructs his speech carefully, marshalling his points in praise of the Spartans.

ἀντιώσονταί τοι ἐς μάχην: the whole of this section of the text is imbued with Herodotus’ retrospective knowledge of the Battle of Thermopylae, which took place in August 480. The bravery of the 300 Spartans who held the narrow pass of Thermopylae against the vast Persian host achieved an instantaneous legendary status which persists to this day. Famous details of the story endure in the memory: the astonishment of the Persian spy who observed the Spartans coolly combing their long hair before the battle; the Laconic reply of Dieneces when he was warned that the Persians were so numerous their arrows would blot out the sun (‘… then we can fight them in the shade’); the epitaph for the Spartan dead (‘Report to the people of Lacedaemon, stranger, that here, obedient to their orders, we lie’). Herodotus obviously cannot refer to the battle openly, since when the conversation described here takes place it has yet to occur (he tells the story in 7.201 and following), but it clearly strongly influences what he writes about the Spartans.

7.102.3

ἀριθμοῦ δὲ πέρι, μή πύθῃ ὅσοι …: Xerxes has been obsessed with the size of his expedition, holding fast to the belief that numerical superiority must lead to victory. cf. his conversation with Artabanus above at 7.48. Demaratus, however, makes it clear that numbers to Spartans are just that.

οὗτοι μαχήσονταί τοι, ἤν τε ἐλάσσονες τούτων ἤν τε καὶ πλεῦνες: again we think of Thermopylae, where the Persians were fabulously numerous, and the Spartans famously numbered only 300.

7.103.1

γελάσας: Xerxes’ response is marked by incredulity and a persistent inability to see conflict as anything other than a simple numbers game.

διπλήσιον: the reference to the king having to fight twice as many men as the ordinary Spartan alludes to the fact that the kings, as Herodotus tells us at 6.57, were given a double portion of food at feasts. The words given to Xerxes by Herodotus suggest that he has spent time talking to Demaratus about the customs of Sparta, but that he is here wrongly extrapolating from one situation to another, creating a sort of reductio ad absurdum in which, because the kings were given a double portion of food, they had to have or do twice over whatever any other Spartan had or did in any circumstance. Once again, Herodotus presents Xerxes as rather literal-minded and convinced that numerical superiority is key.

7.103.2

κόμπος: a din or clash, coming to mean as here ‘a boast’.

7.103.3

ἐόντες γε ἐλεύθεροι πάντες ὁμοίως καὶ μὴ ὑπ᾽ ἑνὸς ἀρχόμενοι: in the discussion about constitutions in Book 3, Darius speaks in favour of rule by one individual: ‘A single individual who cannot be improved upon is self-evidently the best – for the judgement of such a man can be deployed in the governance of his people, without his ever being criticised’ (3.82).

χίλιοι … μύριοι … πεντακισμύριοι, … ἑνὸς … ἕνα … χίλιοι, … πέντε χιλιάδων: the concentration of numbers in this short passage is remarkable. We have already observed Xerxes’ general obsession with numbers. It begins to sound here rather as though, as with the repeated negatives noted above at 7.101.2, doubt is creeping in and he is attempting to convince himself as well as his audience that his numerical superiority really will count in the final analysis.

7.103.4

δειμαίνοντες τοῦτον: Xerxes’ view that a strong leader might inspire his troops to achieve better things is underpinned by the belief that this has to come about through fear. This is certainly the principle upon which the Persian empire has achieved success and he is unable to conceive of another. Indeed it is fair to say that the Spartans whose freedom is so vaunted by Demaratus were themselves operating in fear, as he himself goes on to explain in the next chapter, although it is fear not of an individual but of the law and customs of their land.

ἀναγκαζόμενοι μάστιγι: Herodotus has already told us in 7.56 that the Persian soldiers were lashed forwards by commanders with whips to encourage them to cross the pontoons over the Hellespont, and again at 7.223 he records that the army was whipped forward at the Battle of Thermopylae. To a Greek audience, this detail would only serve to emphasize the cultural difference between them and the Persians; for Greeks, only slaves were whipped. The insertion of this phrase here shows Xerxes’ total lack of understanding of the Spartan patriotism and courage that Demaratus is describing.

ἀνειμένοι δὲ ἐς τὸ ἐλεύθερον οὐκ ἂν ποιέοιεν τούτων οὐδέτερα: Xerxes’ view of human nature is pessimistic and diametrically opposed to Demaratus’.

7.103.5

ἀλλὰ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ... τοῦτο ἐστὶ τὸ σὺ λέγεις: Xerxes has worked himself into petulant-sounding outrage at Demaratus’ claims for the Spartans.

εἰσὶ γὰρ Περσέων τῶν ἐμῶν αἰχμοφόρων οἳ ἐθελήσουσι Ἑλλήνων ἀνδράσι τρισὶ ὁμοῦ μάχεσθαι: this begins to sound like childish boast-trading.

φλυηρέεις: ‘you are talking nonsense’: a highly dismissive word to finish this speech with.

By the end of this speech, as is illustrated by the three quotations above, Herodotus has shown us Xerxes at his childish worst: gone for the moment is the reasonable and reflective interlocutor of the exchanges with Artabanus. Insecurity, a longing to believe that the system he knows is the correct and only successful one, the need to convince himself that his army is the greatest the world has ever seen and will carry success before it, and a deep-seated fear that this might not prove to be the case all help to explain his tone here.

7.104.1

ἀρχῆθεν ἠπιστάμην ὅτι ἀληθείῃ χρεώμενος οὐ φίλα τοι ἐρέω: Demaratus continues to sound unflappable and wise, throwing the word ἀληθείῃ back at Xerxes one last time: he’d known all along that the truth would be unpalatable to a king seeking the flattery and obsequious agreement he has come to expect.

τὰ κατήκοντα Σπαρτιήτῃσι: ‘how things stand with the Spartans’.

7.104.2

οἵ με τιμήν τε καὶ γέρεα ἀπελόμενοι πατρώια ἄπολίν τε καὶ φυγάδα πεποιήκασι: Herodotus explains how this came about in 6.61. Demaratus was said to have slandered Cleomenes in his absence, and Cleomenes on his return plotted to depose him.

οὐκ ὦν οἰκός … στέργειν μάλιστα: Demaratus makes his gratitude and loyalty clear, using conventional, gnomic language.

7.104.3

εἰ δὲ ἀναγκαίη εἴη: this seems a slightly dangerous thing to say: knowing Xerxes, we might expect him to make exactly such a demand as this on a whim, especially in the kind of petulant mood he is displaying in this passage.

7.104.4

ὣς δὲ καὶ Λακεδαιμόνιοι κατὰ μὲν ἕνα μαχόμενοι οὐδαμῶν εἰσι κακίονες ἀνδρῶν, ἁλέες δὲ ἄριστοι ἀνδρῶν ἁπάντων: the Spartans’ reputation for bravery was pre-eminent. In Thucydides Book 6, Nicias says ‘military honour is the be-all and end-all of their existence’ and Xenophon’s Constitution of the Spartans explains the terrible outcome for anyone branded a coward in Sparta, concluding, ‘I don’t wonder that where such a load of dishonour burdens the coward death seems preferable instead of a dishonoured and shameful life.’ (9.6) The balance and contrast of this sentence (κατὰ μὲν ἕνα … ἁλέες; κακίονες … ἄριστοι; οὐδαμῶν ... ἀνδρῶν … ἀνδρῶν ἁπάντων) together with the assonance in the last clause, focus the audience’s attention on this, the key point of Demaratus’ speech.

ἐλεύθεροι γὰρ ἐόντες οὐ πάντα ἐλεύθεροι εἰσί· ἔπεστι γάρ σφι δεσπότης νόμος: νόμος here means not just law but custom, habit and tradition. The use of the word δεσπότης is pointed: the Spartans might regard νόμος as their δεσπότης, but the word means something rather different to Demaratus from what it would mean to a Persian under Xerxes. For Demaratus, there is a fundamental difference between a society in which everyone is subject to the same mutually agreed laws and customs, even when the penalties for breaking those laws are severe and terrifying, and one in which the people are at the whim of a single leader who may be capricious or cruel. For Demaratus, the fundamental freedom which he claims for the Spartans seems to consist in freedom from rule by an individual, or indeed another state, since personal freedom was clearly heavily curtailed. A Spartan would certainly be a stranger to the sort of personal and political freedom enjoyed by some members of Athenian society.

τὸν ὑποδειμαίνουσι πολλῷ ἔτι μᾶλλον ἢ οἱ σοὶ σέ: there is something thrilling for the audience in Herodotus’ portrayal of Demaratus’ boldness in telling Xerxes some plain truths.

ποιεῦσι γῶν τὰ ἂν ἐκεῖνος ἀνώγῃ· ἀνώγει δὲ τὠυτὸ αἰεί, οὐκ ἐῶν φεύγειν οὐδὲν πλῆθος ἀνθρώπων ἐκ μάχης, ἀλλὰ μένοντας ἐν τῇ τάξι ἐπικρατέειν ἢ ἀπόλλυσθαι: this explanation hints at the famous supposed parting cry of Spartan mothers to their sons as recorded by Plutarch, ‘Come back with your shield or on it’. This, together with what Xenophon has to say about those convicted of cowardice (discussed above), makes it clear that desertion from battle was regarded as a terrible crime by the Spartans. We should not interpret this as an addiction to senseless self-sacrifice, however: evidence shows that the sort of treatment of cowards described by Xenophon was reserved for those who had deserted when the rest of their contingent had stood firm. It is clear that an agreed retreat by the whole contingent was perfectly acceptable in circumstances where no military advantage would accrue from continuing to hold out. For example, the Spartans at Thermopylae only learned that they had been outflanked on the third morning of the battle, at which point the most important concern was to create time for the rest of the Greek forces to withdraw to continue the defence of Greece: the last stand of the 300 is not a futile heroic gesture but a considered strategic plan. By contrast, the 120 Spartans who surrendered to the Athenians on the island of Sphacteria in 425 BC during the Peloponnesian War did so with the full approval of the Spartan leadership to prevent unnecessary casualties. Sparta worked hard for the return of these captives and although they were demoted from full citizenship for a period, they were later fully reinstated.

σοὶ δὲ εἰ φαίνομαι ταῦτα λέγων φλυηρέειν, ἀλλα σιγᾶν θέλω τὸ λοιπόν· νῦν τε ἀναγκασθεὶς ἔλεξα: Demaratus replies bluntly to Xerxes’ accusation that he is talking nonsense, picking up the same verb (φλυηρέειν) employed by the king at the end of his preceding speech, and reminding him that he has spoken frankly because he was required by Xerxes to do so.

γένοιτο μέντοι κατὰ νόον τοι, βασιλεῦ: ‘But may your wish be fulfilled, King’. Demaratus concludes with one of the formulaic wishes for the ruler’s well-being or success which pepper the speech of the subjects of absolute rulers (‘Oh king, may you live forever …’). He is assuring Xerxes that he realizes that his moment of freedom to speak truth to power is over.

7.105.1

Ξέρξης δὲ ἐς γέλωτά τε ἔτρεψε καὶ οὐκ ἐποιήσατο ὀργὴν οὐδεμίαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἠπίως αὐτὸν ἀπεπέμψατο: as we have seen from other episodes, given Xerxes’ unpredictable character, this could very easily have turned out differently. Either Demaratus has shown great skill in averting the possible wrath of the king by the reassertion of his inferior status noted above or Xerxes is so far from being able to understand Demaratus’ ideological standpoint that he is able to dismiss what he says as laughably unimportant.

ὕπαρχον ἐν τῷ Δορίσκῳ: Doriscus was last mentioned in 7.59 as being the place where Xerxes held a review of his troops. It is both the name of a region in Thrace and of the royal fortress built there by Darius. Mascames is being appointed at least as commander of the garrison installed in the fort, and probably also as satrap of the region. (In the next chapter, after the end of the set text prescription, Herodotus tells us that Mascames was greatly admired by Xerxes, especially because he was never deposed by the Greeks and continued successfully to defend Doriscus. As a mark of his regard, Xerxes sent Mascames yearly gifts, and his son, Artaxerxes, continued to reward Mascames’ heirs.)

τὸν δὲ ὑπὸ Δαρείου σταθέντα καταπαύσας: Xerxes replaces the former incumbent with his own man. The periphrasis here perhaps suggests that Herodotus was unable to find out the name of Darius’ appointee.

Vocabulary

An asterisk * denotes a word in OCR’s Defined Vocabulary List for AS.

ἀβουλία, -ας, ἡ	ill-advisedness, thoughtlessness
ἄβουλος, ον	ill-advised
Ἄβυδος, -ου, ἡ	Abydos
*ἀγαθός, -ή, -όν	good
*ἄγγελος, ου, ὁ	messenger, envoy
ἄγερσις, εως, ἡ	gathering, mustering
ἀγνωμοσύνη, -ης, ἡ	want of sense, folly
ἀγορεύω	to speak in the assembly, advise
*ἄγω, fut. inf. ἄξεσθαι	to bring, lead to get
ἀδελφεός, -εοῦ, ὁ	brother
*ἀδελφή, -ης, ἡ	sister
*ἀδικέω	to do wrong
*ἄδικος, -όν	wrong, unjust
*Ἀθηναῖος, -α, -ον	Athenian
Αἰγύπτιος, -η, ον	Egyptian
Αἴγυπτος, -ου, ἡ	Egypt
αἰθήρ, έρος, ἡ	heaven
Αἰθίοψ, -οπος, ὁ	Ethiopian
αἰνέω	to praise
Αἰολεύς, -έως, ὁ	Aeolian
*αἱρέομαι, aor. inf. ἑλέσθαι	to choose
αἱρετός	to be chosen, desirable
*αἱρέω, 1st aor. subj. ἕλω	to take, seize
αἰσχρῶς	badly, shamefully
*αἴτιος, -α, ον	responsible, guilty
αἰών, -ῶνος, ὁ	life
ἀκήρατος, ον	pure
*ἀκούω + acc. of sound, gen of person	to hear
ἄκρη, -ης, ἡ	summit
*ἀκτή, -ης, ἡ	headland, promontory
Ἀλευάδαι, -ῶν, οἱ	the Aleuadai
ἀλήθεια, -ας, ἡ	truth
*ἀληθής, -ές ἀληθέστατος, -η, ον	true, clear most true, most clear
ἁλίσκομαι, aor. part. ἁλούς	to be captured
ἄλκιμος, -ον	brave, valiant
*ἀλλήλους, -ῶν	one another
ἁλμυρός, -ά, όν	briny, salty (of the sea)
ἄλσος, -εος, τό	grove
ἅλωσις, -εως, ἡ	capture
ἀμείβομαι	to reply
ἀμείνων	better
ἄμεινον	the better
*ἀμφότερος, -α, -ον	both
ἀναβαίνω	come up
*ἀναγιγνώσκω	to persuade, induce
*ἀναγκάζω	to force, compel
*ἀνάγκη, -ης, ἡ	necessity
ἀνάγω	to lead up
ἀνάξιος, -ον	unworthy
ἀναπείθω	to persuade
ἀναρτέομαι	to be ready, prepared
*ἀναχωρέω	to revert
ἀνευρίσκω	to find, discover
ἀνεψιός, -οῦ, ὁ	cousin
ἀνήκω	to have come up to
*ἀνήρ, ἀνδρός, ὁ	man
ἀνθρώπειος, -α, -ον	human
ἀνθρώπινος, -η, -ον	of man, human
*ἄνθρωπος, -ου, ὁ	man
ἀνοιδέω	to swell up
ἀντίξοος, -ον	opposed to, adverse
ἀντιόομαι	to resist, oppose
ἀντίος, -ία, -ίον	against
ἀντιτάσσω	to set opposite to, range against
*ἄξιος, -ία, -ιον	worthy
ἀπαλλάσσω	to get off, escape
ἀπαμύνω	to keep off, ward off
ἀπαντίον	opposite
ἅπαξ	once
ἄπειμι	to be absent
ἀπείρητος, -ον	untried
ἀπέρχομαι	to go away, retreat
ἀποβαίνω	to disembark
ἀποβάλλω	to throw away, lose
ἀποδείκνυμι	to point out, make known, make, render
*ἀποθνήσκω	to die, be killed
ἀποκρύπτω	to cover, hide
ἀπολιμπάνω	to leave
ἀπονοστέω	to return
ἀποτέμνω	to cut off
ἀποφαίνω	to reveal
*ἀρετή, -ῆς, ἡ	goodness, excellence
Ἀρτάβανος, -ου, ὁ	Artabanos
Ἀρταφρένης, -ους, ὁ	Artaphrenes
ἀρχαῖος, -α, -ον	old
Ἀρισταγόρας, -ου, ὁ	Aristagoras
ἄριστος, -η, -ον	best, noblest
Ἀρίστων, -ωνος, ὁ	Ariston
ἀρρωδέω	to dread, shrink from
*ἀρχή, -ῆς, ἡ κατ᾽ ἀρχάς	beginning; in the beginning, at first
ἀρχῆθεν	from the beginning
*ἄρχω	to rule, command
*ἀσθενής, -ές	weak
Ἀσσύριοι, -ῶν, οἱ	Assyrians
*ἄστυ, -εως, τό	town
Ἀστυάγης, -ους, ὁ	Astyages
ἀτάσθαλος, -ον	wicked, presumptuous, insolent
ἀτρεκής, -ές	strict, precise, exact, true
ἀτρεμίζω	keep quiet
Ἀττική, -ῆς, ἡ	Attica
αὐτόματος, -η, -ον	acting of one’s own will
αὐτόφωρος, -ον	self-detected, in the act, red-handed
ἀφανίζω	to make unseen, hide
ἀφεστήξω	to stand away, rebel
*ἀφικνέομαι, perf. part.ἀπιγμένοι	to arrive
Ἀχαιμένης, -ους, ὁ	Achaemenes
ἄχαρις, ἄχαρι	grievous
*βάρβαρος, -ον	barbarian, outlandish, barbarous
*βασιλεύς, -έως, ὁ	king
βασιληίη, ῆς, ἡ	kingdom, rule
βέλος, -εος, τό	missile
*βίος, -ου, ὁ	life
βιοτή, -ῆς, ἡ	life
Βόσπορος, -ου, ὁ	the Bosphorus
βούλευμα, -ατος, τό	plan, resolution
*βουλεύω	to take counsel, deliberate
*βούλομαι	to wish, be willing
βραχύς, -εῖα, ύ	short
βροντή, -ῆς, ἡ	thunder
βύβλινος, -η, -ον	made of papyrus
*γελάω	to laugh, smile
γέλως, -ωτος, ὁ	laughter
γεύω	to give a taste
*γέφυρα, -ας, ἡ	bridge
γεφυρόω	to make a bridge over
*γῆ, -ῆς, ἡ	land
*γίγνομαι	to happen
*γιγνώσκω	to learn, get to know
γλυκύς, -εῖα, ύ	sweet
*γνώμη, -ης, ἡ	opinion
*γυνή, -αικός, ἡ	wife
δαιμόνιος, -α, -ον	divine, miraculous
*δακρύω	weep, shed tears
Δαρεῖος, -ου, ὁ	Darius
δασμοφόρος, -ον	bringing tribute
Δάτις, -ιδος, ὁ	Datis
*δεῖ	there is need, it is necessary
δείδω	to fear
δεῖμα, -ατος, τό	fear
δεινός, -ή, -όν	strange, terrible
*δέκα	ten
δένδρεον, -ου, τό	tree
*δέομαι	to ask for, beg
δεσποσύνη, -ης, ἡ	absolute rule, tyranny
*δεσπότης, -ου, ὁ	master, lord
*δεύτερος, -α, -ον	second
δέω	to lack
Δημάρητος, -ου, ὁ	Demaratus
*διαβαίνω	to cross
διαβάλλω	to slander, falsely accuse
διαβολή, -ῆς, ἡ	slander, false accusation
διαγιγνώσκω	to distinguish, know one from the other
διαθέτης, -ου, ὁ	one who sets in order
διαιρέω	to define
διαλύω	to destroy, dissolve
διασῴζω	to save and preserve
*διαφθείρω	to destroy
διαφορά, -ᾶς	difference, dispute
διαφορέω	to spread about, tear apart
διαχράομαι	to make use of
*δίδωμι fut. δώσω	to give
διεκπλέω	to sail out through
διεξέρχομαι	to pass through
διεργάζομαι	to make an end of, destroy
*δίκαιος, -α, -ον	right, just
*δικαιοσύνη, -ης, ἡ	justice
*δίκην διδόναι	to pay the penalty, make amends
διό	because of which
διπλάσιος, -α, ον	double
*δοκέω	to seem
Δορίσκος, -ου, ὁ	Doriscos
δούλιος, -α, -ον	servile, of slavery
*δοῦλος, -ου, ὁ	slave
δουλοσύνη, -ης, ἡ	slavery
δουλότερος, -α, -ον	more enslaved
*δύναμαι	to be strong enough, be able, be powerful
*δύναμις, -εως, ἡ	power
*δύο	two
δυσχείρωτος, -ον	hard to subdue
δώρημα, -ατος, τό	gift
Δωριεύς, -εῶς, ὁ	Dorian
*δῶρον, -ου, τό	gift
*ἐάω	to allow
ἐγείρω	to raise
*ἐθέλω	to want, be willing
*ἔθνος, -εος, τό	tribe, people
εἰκάζω	to guess
εἴωθα	to be accustomed, be wont
*εἰμί	to be
εἵνεκα	on account of
*εἶπον (aor. of λέγω)	I said
εἰρημένος	having been spoken
*εἷς, μία, ἕν	one
ἑκαστέρω	farther
ἑκατοστός, -ή, όν	hundredth
ἐκβαίνω	to step out of, disembark
ἐκγίγνεται	(impersonal) it is granted
ἐκλέγω	to pick
ἐκμανθάνω	to learn thoroughly
ἐκτείνω	to be eager for
ἔλασις, -εως, ἡ	expedition
ἐλάσσων	less
*ἐλαύνω	to drive, set in motion, lead
ἐλαφρός, -ά, -όν	light, trivial
ἐλάχιστος, -η, -ον	smallest, least
*ἐλεύθερος, -α, -ν	free
*Ἑλλάς, -άδος, ἡ	Greece
Ἑλλήσποντος, -ου, ὁ	Hellespont
*ἐλπίζω	to hope
ἐμβάλλω	to attack, throw in
ἐμπίμπρημι	to burn
ἐμπίπλημι	to fill
ἐμποιέω	to put in, insert, interpolate
ἐναντιόομαι	to oppose
ἐναργής, -ές	visible, palpable
ἐνδεής, -ές	wanting, lacking
ἔνειμι, 3rd s. opt. ἐνέοι	to be in
*ἐνθαῦτα = ἐνταῦθα**	then, next
ἐντέλλω	to command
ἐνύπνιον, -ου, τό	dream
ἐξελαύνω	to drive out
ἐξεπίσταμαι	to know thoroughly, understand well
ἐξεργάζομαι	to bring to completion
ἐξηγέομαι	to explain, describe
ἐξευρίσκω	to find, discover
ἐξυβρίζω	to behave insolently
ἐξώλης, -ες	utterly destroyed
ἐπαίρω	to lift up and set on, incite
ἐπακτός, -όν	acquired
ἐπεάν	whenever
ἐπείγω	to press hard, hurry
ἐπεισφέρω	to bring in
ἐπείτε	since
ἐπελαύνω	to march against
ἐπιγίγνομαι	to come after
ἐπιθυμητής, -οῖ, ὁ	one who desires, longs for
ἐπικαλέω	to summon
ἐπίκειμαι	to lie upon, lie near
ἐπίκλητος, -ον	specially summoned
ἐπιλεαίνω	to smooth over
ἐπιλέγω	to pick, cite
ἐπίπλεος, -έη, έον	full of
*ἐπίσταμαι	to know, understand
ἐπίσχω	to hold back
*ἐπιτρέπω	to turn over, hand over
ἐπιτροπεύω	to be an administrator
ἐπιφαίνω	to display
ἔπος, -εος, τό	word
*ἑπτά	seven
*ἐργάζομαι	to work, commit
*ἔργον, -ου, τό	deed, action
ἔρδω	to do
*ἔρχομαι	to go
*ἔτος, -ους, -τό	year
*εὖ	well
*εὐδαίμων, -ον	fortunate, blessed
εὐπρηξίη, -ης, ἡ	success
εὕρημα, -ατος, τό	discovery
Εὐρώπη, -ης, ἡ	Europe
εὐτυχέστατος, -η, -ον	most auspicious
ἐφέπω	to be busy with enterprises
ἐφίστημι	to be placed in authority
ἔχθρη, -ης, ἡ	enmity, hatred
*ἔχω	to have, bear, carry
ζεύγνυμι	to yoke, join opposite banks by bridges
ζεῦγος, -εος, τό	pair
*Ζεύς, Δῖος, ὁ	Zeus
ζημία, -ας, ἡ	loss, damage
ζημιόω	to be punished
ζωή, -ῆς, ἡ	life
ζυγόν, -ου, τό	yoke (a wooden crosspiece fastened over the necks of two animals and attached to a plough or cart)
ζῷον, -ου, τό	creature
*ζώω = ζάω**	to live
ἡγεμονία, -ας, ἡ	leadership, sovereignty
*ἡδύς, -εῖα, ύ	pleasant
ἦθος, -εος, τό	accustomed place
ἡμερόω	to make tame
*ἥκω	to have come, be present
ἥλιος, -ου, ὁ	the sun
ἥμερος, -α, -ον	tame; of plants: cultivated, fruit-bearing
ἥμισυς, -εια, -υ	half
*ἤπειρος, -ου, ἡ	mainland
ἤπιος, -α, -ον	kind, pleasant
ἡσσάομαι	to be beaten
ἤτοι	surely, in truth
*θάλασσα, -ης, ἡ	the sea
*θάνατος, -ου, ὁ	death
θαρσέω	to be of good courage
*θεός, -ου, ὁ	god
Θεσσαλία	Thessaly
θνήσκω	to die
θνητός, -ή, -όν	mortal
θολερός, -ά, -όν	muddy, foul, turbid
θράσος, -εος, τό	courage, boldness
*θρασύς, -εῖα, ύ	bold
Θρήϊξ, -κος, ὁ	Thracian
θρόνος, -ου, ὁ	throne
θυμός, -ου, ὁ	spirit
θυμόω	to make angry, provoke
*θύω	to sacrifice
ἰδιοβουλέω	to follow one’s own counsel, take one’s own way
ἰθύω	to be eager, strive
Ἰνάρως, -ω, ὁ	Inaros (a river)
*ἵστημι	to set up, wage
Ἱστιαῖος, -ου, ὁ	Histiaeus
Ἴστρος, -ου, ὁ	Ister (a river)
Ἰνδός, -ή, -όν	Indian
Ἵππαρχος, -ου, ὁ	Hipparchos
ἱρός, -ή, -όν	holy; as noun: holy place, temple
*ἰσχυρός, -ά, -όν	strong
Ἴων, -ωνος, ὁ	Ionian
καθαιρέω	to take down, depose
καθηγέομαι	to bring in
καθίημι	to throw into
καθοράω	to look down upon
κακόν, -ου, τό	evil, suffering
*κακός, -ή, -όν	bad, evil
*καλέω	to call, summon
*καλός, -ή,-όν	fair
Καμβύσης, -ου, ὁ	Cambyses
καταγελάω	to laugh at
καταλαμβάνω	to put an end to, seize, lay hold of
καταλέγω	to recount
καταπαύω	to put an end to, stop, depose
καταρρωδέω	to fear, dread
καταστρέφω	to subdue, trample
καταφυγή, -ῆς, ἡ	place of refuge
κάτειμι	to go down
κατεργάζομαι	to achieve, work on
κατηγορέω	to accuse, speak against
κατήκοντα, τὰ	circumstances
κατοικέω	to settle in, colonize
κατοικτείρω	to have mercy, pity
κελεύω	to urge, order
κεραυνόω	to strike with thunderbolts
κέρδος, -εος, τό	gain, profit
κεφαλή, -ῆς, ἡ	head
*κῆρυξ, -υκος, ὁ	herald
*κίνδυνος, -ου, ὁ	danger
*κλέπτω	to steal
κνίζω	to chafe, annoy
*κοῖος, -η, -ον = ποῖος**	what sort of
κολούω	to punish
*κομίζω	to carry (passive: to travel)
κου	doubtless
*κτάομαι	to obtain, get for oneself
κτείνω	to kill, slay
κῦδος, -εος, τό	glory, renown
κύων, κυνός, ὁ, ἡ	dog
κω	yet
*λέγω	to say, speak
λεῖος, -α, -ον	smooth
*λείπω + gen.	to be inferior to
λευκόλινον, -ου, τό	flax
Λίβυς, -υος, ὁ	Libyan
*λιμήν, -ένος, ὁ	harbour
λιμός, -οῦ, ὁ	hunger
λογίζομαι	to reckon
*λόγος, -ου, ὁ	word, speech
Λυδός, -ου, ὁ	Lydian
*λύω	to take apart, destroy
μακαρίζω	to bless, think blessed
Μακεδονίη, -ης, ἡ	Macedonia
*μακρός, -ά, -όν	long
*μάλιστα	very much, especially
*μᾶλλον	rather
Μαρδόνιος, -ου, ὁ	Mardonios
μάρτυς, -υρος, ὁ, ἡ	witness
Μασκάμης, ὁ	Mascames
μάστιξ, -ιγος, ὁ	whip
μάταιος, -α, -ον	vain, empty, idle
*μάχη, -ης, ὁ	battle
*μάχομαι	to fight
Μεγαδόστης, ὁ	Megadostes
*μέγας, μεγάλη, μέγα	big, great
μεθίστημι	to change, change one’s mind
*μέλλω	to be about to, be going to
μέμφομαι μεμπτός	to blame, find fault blameworthy, at fault
*μένω	to remain, wait
*μέσος, -η, -ον	middle
μεταβάλλω	to change sides
*μεταπέμπομαι	to send for
μετέπειτα	afterwards
*μέχρι	as far as
*μηδείς, μηδεμία, μηδέν	not one
Μῆδος, -ου, ὁ	Mede
Μιλήσιος, -α, -ον	Milesian
Μίλητος, -ου, ἡ	Miletos
μιμνήσκω	to remind, + gen. = mention
*μοῦνος, -η, -ον	alone, only
μοχθηρός, -ά, -όν	wretched, miserable
*ναυμαχίη, -ης, ἡ	sea-battle
*ναῦς, νεῶς, ἡ	ship
*ναυτικόν, -ου, τό	fleet
νέμω	to possess, dwell in
νεώτερος, -α, -ον	newer
*νῆσος, -ου, ἡ	island
*νικάω	to conquer
νοέω	to intend
νομάς, -αδος, ὁ, ἡ	nomad
*νομίζω	to think, consider
*νόμος, -ου, ὁ	law
*νοῦσος, -ου, ἡ	sickness, disease
Ξέρξης, -ου, ὁ	Xerxes
οἰκεῖος, -α, -ον	of one’s own
οἴκημα, -ατος, τό	house, dwelling, building
οἰκώς, οἰκυῖα, οἰκός	reasonable
οἰκτρός, -ά, -όν	pitiable
ὁκόσος, -α, -ον	as great, as many
ὅκως = ὅπως	as, in such a manner, how
*ὀλίγος, -η, -ον	little, small
ὁμόγλωσσος, -ον	speaking the same language
ὁμουρέω	to border on
ὅμουρος, -ον	having the same borders as
ὄνειρος, -ου, ὁ	dream
Ὀνομάκριτος, -ου, ὁ	Onomacritos
*ὁράω	to see
*ὀργή, -ῆς, ἡ	anger
ὁρμάομαι	to set out, begin
ὄρνις, ὄρνιθος, ὁ	bird
οὐδαμά	never
οὐδαμόθι	nowhere
*οὐδαμῶς	in no way
οὐδείς, οὐδεμία, οὐδέν	no one, nothing
*οὐρανός, -ου, ὁ	heaven
ὄψις, -εως, ἡ	sight, presence, vision
πάθος, -ου, ὁ	suffering, disaster
*παῖς, παιδός, ὁ, ἡ	child
πάμφορος, -ον	productive, fertile
πανοικία, -ας, ἡ	whole household
παντοῖος, -α, -ον	of all sorts
πάντως	in every way
παρά + gen.	from
παραβάλλω	to risk the life of
παραδέχομαι	to receive, inherit
παραλαμβάνω	to receive from
*παρασκευάζω	to prepare
παρατρίβω	to rub beside
παραυτίκα	at once
*πάρειμι	to be present
παρενθήκη	in addition
*παρέχω	to hand over
παρίστημι	to occur to
*πάσχω	to suffer, be treated
*πατήρ, πατρός, ὁ	father
πάτρως, -ωος, ὁ	uncle
*παύομαι	to cease
*παύω	to stop
πέδη, -ης, ἡ	fetter, shackle, manacle, chain
*πέδιον, -ου, τό	plain
*πεζός, -ή, όν	on foot (in m. as noun: infantry)
*πείθω	to persuade
πεῖρα, -ας, ἡ	to attempt, trying
πειράω	to make an attempt, try
Πεισιστρατίδαι, -ῶν, οἱ	the Peisistratids
Πεισίστρατος, -ου, ὁ	Peisistratos
πέλαγος, -εος, τό	sea
Πέλοψ, -οπος, ὁ	Pelops
πενίη, -ης, ἡ	poverty
πέρ	particle adding force
περίειμι	to be around, survive
περικαλλής, -ές	very beautiful
περιποιέω	to keep safe, preserve
*Πέρσης, -ου, ὁ	Persian
πικρός, -ά, -όν	bitter
πιστότης, -ητος, ἡ	good faith
πίσυνος, -ον	trusting on, relying on
πλείων, -ον	more
πλέω	to sail
πληγή, -ης, ἡ	blow, stroke
*πλῆθος, -εος, τό	great number
πληθώρη, -ης, ἡ	satiety, fullness
πλησιόχωρος, -ον	neighbouring, adjacent, bordering on
*ποιέω	to make
*πολέμιος, -α, -ον	of war, hostile, at enmity
*πόλεμος, -ου, ὁ	war
*πόλις, -εως, ἡ	city
πολιτικός, -ή, όν	civic, state
*πολλάκις	often
πολλαπλήσιος, -η, ον	many times greater than
*πολύς, πολλή, πολύ	much, pl. many
πόρος, -ου, ὁ	crossing, route, way through, passage
*ποταμός, -ου, ὁ	river
*πράσσω	to do
Πρέπει	it is fitting
πρεσβύτερος, -α, -ον	elder
πρῆγμα, -ατος, τό	deed, matter
*πρίν	before
προαγορεύω	to proclaim
προβαίνω	to advance
προδειμαίνω	to fear beforehand
προεῖπον (aor. w. no present)	to declare, proclaim
προθυμιη, -ης, ἡ	readiness, willingness, eagerness
*πρόθυμος, ον	willing, eager,
προθύμως	readily, willingly
προκαταλύω	to reconcile
πρόκειμαι	to be set before one
προλέγω	to foretell
προσγίγνομαι	to be added, accrue
πρόσκειμαι	to be placed
προσκτάομαι	to gain, get
προσορέγομαι	to urge
προσπίπτω	to fall upon
προσφέρω	to bring to bear
πρόσω	forwards, onwards
πρότερον	formerly, before
προφέρω	to bring forward
πρῶτα	first of all
Πύθιος, -ου, ὁ	Pythios
*πυνθάνομαι	to learn
πυρόω	to burn
ῥαπίζω	to thrash, whip
Σάκαι, -ῶν, οἱ	Sacae
Σάρδεις, -εων, αἱ	Sardis
σεμνός, -ή, -όν	revered, holy
σημαίνω	to indicate, give a sign
σιωπάω	to be quiet, be silent
σκαιότης, -ητος, ἡ	ineptitude
σκέπτομαι	to look, consider
σμικρός, -ά, -όν	small, unimportant
Σοῦσα,-ῶν, τά	Susa
*σοφίη, -ης, ἡ	wisdom
Σπαρτιάτης, -ου, ὁ	a Spartan
*στάδιον, -ου, τό	stade
σταθμόομαι	to judge, form an estimate
στιγεύς, -έως, ὁ	brander
στίζω	to brand
*στράτευμα, -ατος, τό	expedition
*στρατεύω	to march with an army, advance
στρατηγέω	to be general
στρατηλατέω	to lead an army into the field
*στρατιή, -ῆς, ἡ	army
*στρατός, -ου, ὁ	army
συγκόπτω	to cut down, break down
συλλαμβάνω	to gather together, contribute
*συλλέγω	to gather
σύλλογος, -ου, ὁ	meeting, assembly
συμβάλλομαι	to conjecture
*συμβουλεύω	to advise, counsel
*σύμμαχος, -ον	allied, in league
συμφέρω	to contribute, turn out
*συμφορή, -ῆς, ἡ	misfortune
συναμφότεροι	both together
συναναβαίνω	to go up with
συνέπομαι	to follow along with, accompany
σύνεσις, -εως, ἡ	wit, intelligence
συνταράσσω	to throw into confusion
σύντροφος, -ον	habitual, familiar, endemic
συστρατεύω	to march together with
συστροφή, -ῆς, ἡ	density, mass
σφάλλω	to baffle, passive be mistaken
σφάλμα, -ατος, τό	failure, defeat
*σῶμα, -ατος, τό	body
*ταχύς, -εῖα, -ύ	fast, quick
*τέκνον, -ου, τό	child
*τελευτάω	to die, bring to an end, accomplish
τέρψις, -εως, ἡ	joy, enjoyment, delight
*τίθημι	to establish
τίκτω	to engender, give birth to
τοίνυν	therefore
*τολμάω	to dare
*τρέπω	to turn
τριακόσιοι, ῶν, οἱ	three hundred
*τιμή, -ῆς, ἡ	esteem, honour
τιμιώτατος, -η, -ον	most highly valued
τιμωρέω	to exact vengeance
τίσις, -εως, ἡ	retribution
*τρόπος, -ου, ὁ	way
*τυγχάνω + gen.	to meet with, get
τύραννος, -ου, ὁ	tyrant
*τύχη, -ης, ἡ	chance
*ὕδωρ, -ατος, τό	water
ὕπαρχος, -ου, ὁ	governor, lieutenant
ὑπάρχω	to take the initiative in doing
ὑπερέχω	to be prominent
ὑπερτίθημι	to communicate
ὑποδέξιος, -α, -ον	able to receive
ὑποδύνω	to submit
ὑπολείπω	to leave remaining
ὑπεναντίος, -α, -ον	opposite
ὑπεξαιρέω	to take away, remove
*ὑπέρ + gen.	on behalf of
ὑπόπλεος, -ον	full of
ὑπουργέω	to render service
Ὑστάσπης, -ου, ὁ	Hystaspes (river)
*ὕστερος, -α, -ον	later
φαντάζομαι	to be on display
φάσμα, -ατος, τό	apparition, phantom
φερέγγυος, -ον	providing a guarantee
*φέρω	to carry, bear
φθέγγομαι	to talk about, mention
φθείρω	to destroy
φθονερός, -ά, -όν	envious, jealous
*φθονέω	to grudge, bear ill will
*φιλέω	to love, be wont
*φίλος, -η, -ον	dear, welcome
φλαῦρος, -α, -ον	paltry, worse
φλαύρως ἀκούειν	to be spoken ill of
*φοβέομαι	to fear
*φόβος, -ου, ὁ	panic, flight born of panic
Φοῖνιξ, -ικός, ὁ	a Phoenician
*φονεύω	to murder, kill
φράζω	to point out
φρονέω	to be minded, think
φροντίζω	to consider, reflect
Φρύξ, -υγός, ὁ	a Phrygian
φυλακή, -ῆς, ἡ	the job of guarding
*φυλάσσω	to keep guard, guard against
φύω	to bring forth, be born
χαρίζω	to gratify, please
*χειμών, -ῶνος, ὁ	storm
*χείρ, χειρός, ἡ	hand
χίλιοι, -αι, -α	thousand
*χράομαι + dat.	to consult, use
χρεόν	that which is necessary, fated
*χρήματα, -ῶν, τά	money, wealth
χρή fut. χρήσει	it is necessary
χρησμόλογος, -ον	uttering oracles
χρησμός, -ου, ὁ	oracle
χρησμῳδέω	to deliver oracles, prophesy
χρηστός, -ή, -όν	useful, good
*χρόνος, -ου, ὁ	time
*χρυσός, -οῦ, ὁ	gold
*χωρέω	to advance, succeed
*χώρη, -ης, ἡ	country, place
χωρίζω	to divide
*χωρίον, -ου, τό	place
Ψαμμητίχος, -ου, ὁ	Psammetichos
ψεύδω	to lie

Page

Contents

If you find an error or have any questions, please email us at admin@erenow.org. Thank you!