Herodotus – Histories

Original: Ἡροδότου Ἁλικαρνησσέος ἱστορίης ἀπόδεξις ἥδε , ὡς μή -τε τὰ γενόμενα ἐξ ἀνθρώπων τῷ χρόνῳ ἐξίτηλα γένηται , μή -τε ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά , τὰ μὲν Ἕλλησι τὰ δὲ βαρβάροισι ἀποδεχθέντα , ἀκλεᾶ γένηται , τά τε ἄλλα καὶ δι’ ἣν αἰτίην ἐπολέμησαν ἀλλήλοισι .

Translation: Here is the display of the inquiry of Herodotus of Halicarnassus , so that neither the deeds done by men with the passage of time may become forgotten , nor the great and wonderful deeds , performed by some among the Greeks and by others among the barbarians , may become unrenowned , and also the other things , and for what reason they fought against one another .

Note

This sentence serves as the famous proem (introduction) to Herodotus's Histories, establishing the author's purpose and methodology. The sentence is characterized by a complex, periodic structure that delays the main verb of the subordinate clause (γένηται, 'may become') until the end of the first major section, creating suspense. A key stylistic feature is the use of the correlative conjunctions μή... μή (neither... nor) to introduce two parallel negative clauses, ensuring a balanced structure. Within the second clause, the particle pair μέν... δέ (on the one hand... on the other) creates a chiastic contrast between the Greeks (Ἕλλησι) and the barbarians (βαρβάροισι). The text employs the term 'inquiry' (ἱστορίης) in its original sense of 'investigation' or 'research,' which is central to the work's identity. The phrase 'great and wonderful deeds' (ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά) utilizes asyndeton (the omission of a conjunction between the two adjectives, though τε is present here as a connective particle, the rhythm suggests a tight pairing) to emphasize the magnitude of the events. The sentence concludes by expanding the scope of the inquiry to include the underlying causes (αἰτίην) of the conflicts, highlighting the historian's focus on causality rather than mere chronicle.

Original: Περσέων μέν νυν οἱ λόγιοι Φοίνικας αἰτίους φασὶ γενέσθαι τῆς διαφορῆς .

Translation: The learned men of the Persians now say that the Phoenicians were the cause of the difference .

Note

This sentence illustrates the use of the conjunction μέν (men) to set up a contrast, typically expecting a following clause with δέ (de) to complete the thought, though the contrast is not present in this isolated segment. The term λόγιοι (logioi) refers to those learned in tradition or history, functioning here as the subject of the reporting verb φασι (they say). The construction φασι + infinitive (γενέσθαι) is a standard indirect statement structure where the subject of the infinitive (Φοίνικας) is in the accusative case, and the predicate nominative (αιτίους) agrees with it in case, number, and gender. The phrase τῆς διαφορῆς (of the difference/dispute) uses the genitive case to indicate the specific matter for which the Phoenicians are held responsible. Stylistically, the sentence employs a balanced structure where the ethnic group (Persians) is modified by an adjective indicating their status as knowledge-bearers, while the subject of the reported clause (Phoenicians) is the direct object of the accusation. The use of the aorist infinitive γενέσθαι emphasizes the inception or completion of the state of being the cause, rather than an ongoing process.

Original: τούτους γὰρ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἐρυθρῆς καλεομένης θαλάσσης ἀπικομένους ἐπὶ τήνδε τὴν θάλασσαν , καὶ οἰκήσαντας τοῦτον τὸν χῶρον τὸν καὶ νῦν οἰκέουσι , αὐτίκα ναυτιλίῃσι μακρῇσι ἐπιθέσθαι , ἀπαγινέοντας δὲ φορτία Αἰγύπτιά τε καὶ Ἀσσύρια τῇ τε ἄλλῃ ἐσαπικνέεσθαι καὶ δὴ καὶ ἐς Ἄργος .

Translation: For these men , having come from the sea called the Erythraean to this sea and having settled in this region which they still inhabit , should immediately attack with long voyages , bringing back Egyptian and Assyrian cargoes and also arriving elsewhere and indeed even at Argos .

Note

The sentence relies heavily on a series of aorist and present participles (ἀπικομένους, οἰκήσαντας, ἀπαγινέοντας) that function adverbially to describe the subject's prior actions and ongoing habits, creating a dense narrative flow typical of Herodotus's historical exposition. The syntax features a 'proleptic' or anticipatory structure where the main infinitive phrase (ἐπιθέσθαι) is modified by these participial clauses. Stylistically, the sentence employs asyndeton (the omission of conjunctions) between the participial phrases to accelerate the rhythm of the historical account. The phrase 'τῆς Ἐρυθρῆς καλεομένης θαλάσσης' is a notable periphrastic construction using a present passive participle to define a geographical feature by its common name. The enumeration of destinations (elsewhere and 'indeed even at Argos') uses the emphatic particle combination 'δὴ καὶ' to highlight the surprising extent of their maritime reach, extending from the Near East to mainland Greece. The use of the dual number is absent here, but the plural 'ναυτιλίῃσι' (voyages) is used with the adjective 'μακρῇσι' (long) to emphasize the strategic distance covered.

Original: τὸ δὲ Ἄργος τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον προεῖχε ἅπασι τῶν ἐν τῇ νῦν Ἑλλάδι καλεομένῃ χωρῇ .

Translation: And at this time , Argos was superior to all the territories in what is now called Hellas .

Note

The verb προεῖχε (from προέχω) carries the specific meaning of 'to be superior to' or 'to excel over,' often used in historical or political contexts to denote preeminence in power or prestige rather than physical extension. The phrase 'what is now called Hellas' (τῶν ἐν τῇ νῦν Ἑλλάδι καλουμένῃ χώρᾳ) highlights the fluidity of the term 'Hellas' (Ἑλλάς) in the ancient world; while the term existed in Homer, its usage as a collective political designation for the Greek world evolved over time. The sentence employs a participial construction (καλουμένῃ) to define the region, a common historiographical device for clarifying geographical boundaries for the audience. The dative plural ἅπασιν functions as the object of the comparison, emphasizing the totality of the territories surpassed by Argos.

Original: ἀπικομένους δὲ τούς Φοίνικας ἐς δὴ τὸ Ἄργος τοῦτο διατίθεσθαι τὸν φόρτον .

Translation: When the Phoenicians had arrived at this Argos , they set about distributing the cargo .

Note

The sentence utilizes an accusative and infinitive construction where the participle ἀπικομένους (having arrived) functions adverbially to indicate the time of the main action, while the infinitive διατίθεσθαι (to distribute/set in order) serves as the object of an implied verb of mental activity or intention (often understood as 'they decided to' or 'they proceeded to' from the context of the narrative). The phrase 'this Argos' (τοῦτο Ἀργος) is significant because Herodotus often distinguishes between the famous Argos in the Peloponnese and another Argos in the Peloponnese (or potentially a different location depending on the specific passage's geography, though often this refers to a specific local context or a specific Argos known to the audience to distinguish it from others). The word φορτον (cargo) suggests a commercial or maritime context, typical of Phoenician activities. The use of the definite article before the ethnonym 'Phoenicians' (τοὺς Φοίνικας) identifies them as a specific group previously mentioned or known in the narrative flow. The particle δὲ (but/and) connects this event to the preceding narrative, maintaining the flow of the story.

Original: πέμπτῃ δὲ ἢ ἕκτῃ ἡμέρῃ ἀπ’ ἧς ἀπίκοντο , ἐξεμπολημένων σφι σχεδόν πάντων , ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν γυναῖκας ἄλλας τε πολλάς καὶ δὴ καὶ τοῦ βασιλέος θυγατέρα ·

Translation: On the fifth and sixth day after they arrived , with nearly all of them having been sold , they came to the sea , bringing with them other many women and indeed also the king 's daughter .

Note

This sentence employs a genitive absolute construction ('ἐξεμπολημένων σφῶν σχεδὸν πάντων'), which provides background circumstances (the sale of the captives) independent of the main clause's subject. The phrase 'πέμπτη δὲ ἕκτη ἡμέρῃ' uses the coordinating particle 'δέ' to connect this time marker to the narrative flow, while the pairing of 'πέμπτη' and 'ἕκτη' creates a hendiadys-like effect, emphasizing the passage of two specific days. The sentence structure builds tension through asyndeton in the list of captives brought to the sea, culminating in the dramatic revelation of the 'βασιλέως θυγάτηρα' (the king's daughter). The emphatic particle 'δή' before 'καὶ' (δηὶ καὶ) serves to heighten the shock or significance of including the royal daughter among the captives. The syntax reflects the historiographical style of recording events with precise temporal markers and the stark reality of enslavement.

Original: τὸ δέ οἱ οὔνομα εἶναι , κατὰ τω- τὠυτὸ τὸ καὶ Ἕλληνές λέγουσι , Ἰοῦν τὴν Ἰνάχου ·

Translation: But her name is Io , the daughter of Inachus , according to the very same thing which the Greeks call it .

Note

The sentence features an epexegetic (explanatory) clause structure where the main assertion ('her name is Io') is immediately clarified by a relative clause introduced by the demonstrative 'τὠυτο' (that very thing). The phrase 'κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ' (according to the very same thing) acts as an adverbial modifier indicating the standard of reference for the name. The use of the genitive 'Ιναχου' (Inachou) denotes patronymic or genealogical relationship, identifying Io as the daughter of the river-god Inachus, a figure central to Argive mythology. Stylistically, the sentence employs a parenthetical interruption with the relative clause ('κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ τὸ καὶ Ἕλληνες λέγουσι'), a common Herodotean device to insert ethnographic or etymological commentary without breaking the narrative flow. The particle 'δέ' (but) at the beginning suggests a contrast with a preceding statement, likely regarding the local name versus the Greek name. The word 'Ἕλληνες' (Greeks) is used here to denote the broader Hellenic cultural identity in contrast to local Argive traditions, reflecting Herodotus's frequent interest in naming conventions across different cultures.

Original: ταύτας στάσας κατά πρύμνην τῆς νεὸς ὠνέεσθαι τῶν φορτίων τῶν σφι ἦν θυμός μάλιστα ·

Translation: They ordered them to be moored at the stern of the ship so that they might purchase the cargo that they most desired .

Note

The sentence features a complex construction where the aorist participle 'στάσας' (having caused to stand/moored) functions adverbially to indicate the means or manner by which the main verbal idea of 'ωνεέσθαι' (to buy/purchase) is accomplished. The phrase 'κατὰ πρύμνην' utilizes a preposition with the accusative to denote position 'along the stern,' a specific nautical term in Ancient Greek referring to the rear of the vessel. The relative clause 'τῶν σφίν ἦν θυμὸς μάλιστα' employs the verb 'ἦν' (was) with the dative 'σφίν' (to them) to express an internal state of desire or inclination, literally 'the desire was for them most of all.' This construction is a hallmark of Herodotean style, where abstract nouns like 'θυμός' (spirit, desire, anger) are frequently used with the verb 'to be' to denote personal inclination or emotional drive rather than a physical location. The word order places the emphatic adverb 'μάλιστα' (most) at the very end of the clause for emphasis.

Original: καὶ τοὺς Φοίνικας διακελευσαμένους ὁρμῆσαι ἐπ’ αὐτάς .

Translation: And having urged the Phoenicians to make an attack upon them .

Note

The sentence features an aorist active participle, διακελευσαμένους (from διακελεύομαι, 'to urge strongly' or 'to exhort'), which functions as an adverbial modifier to the implied main verb of the surrounding narrative. The participle agrees in case, number, and gender with its subject, Φοίνικας (the Phoenicians), which is in the accusative case, indicating an accusative and infinitive construction (or more precisely, an accusative with a complementary infinitive in this context). The verb ὁρμῆσαι (to make a rush/attack) is an aorist infinitive complementing the participle. The preposition ἐπί (upon) governs the accusative pronoun αὐτάς (them), referring to a previously mentioned group of enemies or targets. Stylistically, the use of διακελεύομαι adds a tone of vigorous exhortation rather than simple advice. The conjunction καί (and) links this action to a preceding clause, typical of Herodotean narrative flow where actions are chained together to maintain momentum.

Original: τὰς μὲν δὴ πλεῦνας τῶν γυναικῶν ἀποφυγεῖν , τὴν δὲ Ἰοῦν σὺν ἄλλῃσι ἁρπασθῆναι .

Translation: As for the many sides of the women , they were to be avoided ; but Io was to be seized by others .

Note

The sentence employs a clear chiastic structure through the particles μέν...δέ..., which mark a contrast between two infinitival clauses functioning as the object of an implied verb of saying or commanding (typical of indirect speech or reported decree). The first clause, ταῦς μὲν πλευὰς τῶν γυναικῶν ἀποφυγεῖν, is syntactically irregular in the provided analysis; πλευὰς (accusative plural of πολύς) is likely a scribal corruption or a rare usage for 'sides' or 'flanks' (perhaps intended as πλευράς), but here it is glossed with the lemma πολύς ('many'), suggesting the phrase may be interpreted as 'the many sides' or, more plausibly in context, 'the many women' if πλευὰς is a corruption of γυναῖκας. However, given the explicit lemma πολύς, the translation reflects 'many sides' literally, though this may be a textual variant. The second clause, τὴν δὲ Ἰὼν σὺν ἄλλῃσι ἁρπασθῆναι, contrasts Io's fate with that of the women: while the women are to be avoided, Io is to be seized by others. The use of σὺν + dative (σὺν ἄλλῃσι) emphasizes accompaniment, suggesting Io is taken not alone but with other women. The infinitives ἀποφυγεῖν and ἁρπασθῆναι are both in the aorist passive (or active for ἀποφυγεῖν, which is deponent), indicating completed action in a future or general sense, typical of indirect discourse. The sentence likely reflects a mythological narrative involving Io's abduction, contrasting her fate with that of other women. No specific literary devices beyond the μέν...δέ contrast are present, though the parallelism of structure enhances the dramatic tension between avoidance and seizure.