Customer Reviews

Herodotus: The History

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

By an costly combination of circumstances, I wound up recently linking three different translations in reading through Herodotus. Here's a comparative review of each, which I'm posting for each work.

1. Translation by G.C. Macaulay and revised throughout by Donald Lateiner; published by Barnes and Noble Classics in 2004, but the Macaulay translation is from around 1890.

I started with this one, attracted by the extensive introduction by Donald Lateiner. That intro was solid and revealed much that I hadn't been aware of. But the translation, even after Lateiner's revisions, is awkward and stilted. Many of the pronoun references are confusing, making it difficult to follow the narrative thread.

Here's about half of a single sentence: "Now Miltiades son of Kimon had thus taken possession of Lemnos:--After the Pelasgians had been cast out of Attica by the Athenians, whether justly or unjustly,--for about this I cannot tell except the things reported, which are these:--Hecataios on the one hand, the son of Hegesander, said in his history that it was done unjustly: for he said that when the Athenians saw the land which extends below Hymettos, which they had themselves given them to dwell in, as payment for the wall built round the Acropolis in former times, when the Athenians, I say, saw that the land was made good by cultivation, which before was bad or worthless, they were seized with jealousy and with longing to possess the land, and so drove them out, not alleging any other pretext: ..."

The footnotes are generally helpful, although many only state the obvious. They are all integrated with the text, making it unnecessary to keep paging to the back. The text is followed by some interesting additions: A "Repertory" of English translations, a list of comments and works "inspired" by Herodotus, further "comments and questions", an extensive bibliography, and two good Indices with that of proper names separate from the general index.

Maps: There are eight, all of which appear to be from the original Macaulay publication. In any case, they do not appear to be based on the most recent cartography. The first, more extensive maps are helpful, but, to my mind, the others are crudely drawn and lack important detail. Still, I'd give this edition a good rating for maps, since it turns out that eight is a comparatively generous serving.

2. Translation by Aubrey de Selincourt in 1954; revised by John Marincola in 1972, 1996, and 2003; published by Penguin Classics.

Disappointed by the Macaulay/Lateiner translation, I picked this one up on the basis of the strong reputation of Penguin Classics. It has another good introduction, followed by a limited bibliography. The translation itself is much easier to digest.

Here's how it renders the same passage as above: "The events which led to Miltiades' capture of Lemnos were as follows. The Athenians had forced certain Pelasgians to leave Attica. Whether or not they were justified in doing this is not clear; all I can offer are the two contradictory accounts, that of the Athenians themselves, on the one side, and of Hecataeus the son of Hegesander on the other. Hecataeus in his History maintains that the Athenians were in the wrong. According to him, they had given the Pelasgians in payment for building the wall round the Acropolis a tract of land, of poor quality and in bad condition, at the foot of Mt Hymettus; the Pelasgians had improved the land, and when the Athenians saw it changed out of recognition and in first-rate order, they grudged the gift and longed to take it back, until without further justification they forcibly ejected the occupants."

The footnotes, which are more extensive and informative than Lateiner's, are unfortunately all gathered as endnotes, necessitating frequent paging back and forth. There's a brief Glossary, which is far from adequate. A decent Index closes the edition.

Maps: There are only four, gathered together at the front. None of the battle sites are represented. The maps are well-drawn, but sacrifice detail for clarity. This was this edition's weakest aspect. It also lacks the many extras provided by Lateiner.

3. Translation by David Grene; published by the University of Chicago Press, 1987

A friend who owns a used book store provided this in time for the last 2 books of The History. There's a long Introduction, with a deeper focus than the others. Grene says this about his translation: "The English in which Herodotus comes before us should be direct, powerful, and clear but also, I think, a little odd." I found this to be a worthy approach and one which Grene achieves in practice, with little loss of clarity.

Here's that same passage: "Now this is the story of how Miltiades took Lemnos. The Pelasgians had been driven out of Attica by the Athenians--whether justly or otherwise I cannot say, only that Hecataeus, son of Hegisander, mentions it in his account and says that it was unjustly; for, he says, the Athenians had given the Pelasgians a piece of land to live in, under Hymettus, in payment for the wall that was at one time drawn around the Acropolis; and when the Athenians saw this place, which had before been very poor and worthless, now well tilled, they were seized with envy and longing to possess it and drove the Pelasgians out, urging no other pretext against them."

Grene has both footnotes and endnotes, the latter being longer and applicable to whole sections. There is a good Index that also attempts to provide explanatory material. That was a good idea, but it's applied somewhat randomly and was thus more frustrating than helpful.

Maps: There are 4 maps at the end and an additional 4 within the text. Of the 3 editions, this is the only one to include a map of Xerxes' route, but it has a major error. It also has the best map of Ionia.

I'd recommend Grene on the strength of his translation. But Lateiner has the best additional material. None of the three has sufficient maps for anyone who, like I, gets hung up on the many unfamiliar place names in Herodotus. You'll need a companion book for a better understanding of the geography; I haven't found an ideal solution, but both Wars of the Ancient Greeks by Victor Davis Hanson and The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Greece were helpful.

I have always thought of Herodotus as boring, full of digressions and hot air. He is, however, the First Historian, and therefore needs to be digested by any educated person. I first tried the Rawlinson translation,The Histories (Everyman's Library (Paper)) managed to struggle through it, but found it turgid and indeed boring. I then looked at Walter Blanco's translation in the Norton Critical Edition.Herodotus: The Histories : New Translation, Selections, Backgrounds, Commentaries (Norton Critical Editions) Blanco's version is easier to read than Rawlinson's, but is full of modern American casualisms which seemed incongruous. Blanco's version is also incomplete, and if I were going to read Herodotus, I wanted to read his entire story, just not selections. Some of Blanco's omissions are significant, including most of Book IX, which contains most of the incidents that link the history of Herodotus to that of Thucydides.The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War

I then read David Grene's translation. I still found the early sections on the history of Egypt and Persia and all the digressions about the Scythians and Libyans tedious, but Grene's language is easy to follow and appropriate to the subject, and as I continued reading the narrative began to flow and became quite enjoyable. (I haven't read the MacaulayThe Histories (Barnes & Noble Classics) or SelincourtThe Histories (Penguin Classics) translations.)

R.G. Collingwood in "The Idea of History" The Idea of History: With Lectures 1926-1928rates Herodotus, with all his faults, as superior to Thucydides. This surprised me, as I had always heard Thucydides held up as the epitome a true historian should be. But Collingwood has a point. With all his digressions, myths, and tall tales, Herodotus does his best to evaluate his sources and then tries to tell us as best he can what actually happened, without taking sides and without pointing morals. Thucydides wants to teach and has a definite moral point of view, which no doubt influenced his selection and presentation of the facts.

Herodotus should be read and digested by every educated person, and David Grene's translation makes that easier to do.

Yes, Grene's translation contains anachronistic modernisms, as M.J. Lucero points out. These will bother some readers, but need not interfere with the pleasure that this immensely informative and entertaining book will bring to others. The History is not only filled with wonderful stories that will astound, appall, and delight you, it offers a panorama of the cultures and values of the sixth and fifth century eastern Mediterranean (chiefly Greece, Egypt, and Persia). In addition to accounts of historic individuals and events, there is a wealth of detail about such topics as art, weaving, food, sex, money, marriage and funerary customs, sacrifice, cannibalism, international diplomacy, perceptions of time, and Herodotus's earnest if often off-the-mark descriptions of natural history and geography (which Grene helpfully clarifies in footnotes and endnotes). Oracles and dreams play such a frequent role in political events that it's evident how much more integrated these people were into their view of the cosmos than would be the case later, after the sense of individual autonomy that was just taking hold in Herodotus's time became more universal. Even so, these players are brought alive with vivid personalities that encompass all the human traits, from love and lust to anger, pride, compassion, grief, greed, and madness -- the scope ranges from epic to intimate. Grene has also successfully retained some of the flavor of Herodotus's Ionian Greek, with its occasional eccentric locutions and phrase repetitions, adding to the book's charm. Altogether, a rewarding read.

this is to my mind the only translation for you. Herodotus was not a historian; rather, he was an inquirer, and a displayer of inquiry. I've never read another translation that captures the profound uncertainty about the operation of the universe that radiates from every sentence of his Greek.

The ancient world is a wonderfully unfamiliar place, once you've let go of your preconceptions: reading Grene's Herodotus is a very good way to start letting them go.

Who am I to write a review of Herodotus' The Histories? I am not a classicist, a historian, or a scholar. I wouldn't know the difference between translations, which one is "most true" to the original, which one provides the most accurate analysis of the texts and its accuracies and inaccuracies. So, I have decided that the only way I could review this book is to express how readable it is for a non-scholar who wants to read one of the most ancient of histories, of a time and place far removed from our own, about alien cultures and beliefs, and a complicated war between the ancient Greeks and Persians.

The only reason I read this version is that when I mentioned to my brother once that I had never really read any of the Greek historians, he said I had to read this one and then loaned me his copy. It took me a couple of years, but I finally got around to it. And I found that what he told me is true. The Histories is extremely readable and interesting. Herodotus spent a lot of time giving a background of the conflict, and mixes the historical with what we would call the mystical or fantastic. A lot of time is spent describing the cultures of the Egyptians, the Persians, and the various Greek city-states. If I forgot the significance of a name, I could just look him (rarely a her) in the index, where a short description could be found. If I became confused about where the Thracians were from, I could look at several helpful maps in the back.

There were several times that I became overwhelmed by the details (I guess I didn't appreciate knowing what colors and costumes each people wore during battles). I also had difficulty following from one battle to another, but I'm not sure if that was the fault of the text.

I therefore recommend this for the casual, armchair historian who just wants to learn more about the ancient Greeks while reading a good story. I suspect the book would also work for the more serious scholar who wants to study the text.

I give Herodotus five stars, but Grene would get less for his translation. As one reviewer has already stated, Grene's attempt to put this massive work into modern language has some jarring effects. I can't remember any other historical work that actually uses the F word. It reduces the importance of this book, which is the first significant historical work ever written.

The History is an encyclopedic account of the known world in the 5th century before Christ (or Common Era for you secularists). The reader not only gets a detailed account of the hostilities between Greek and Persian, but also is introduced to in-depth accounts of the various peoples and tribes that inhabit the Near East and Mediterranean region. Drawbacks to Herodotus as a historian is his tendency to exaggerate figures, such as claiming that the Persian forces invading Greece numbered in the millions (at a time when armies rarely numbered over 100,000). Herodotus also has a tendency to tell a story and situation and then say something like, "But I won't go into the reasons for that happening." This makes modern historians cringe! But this is also an example of modern historians trying to instill their views back into history. Let's be glad Herodotus did what he did. A must for ANY student of history.

Having had a couple years of Greek in college (just enough to be dangerous) I have to say Grene's translation looks to me the most literal and readable at the same time. The old Rawlinson translation is stylish but not as close to the Greek as Grene. de Selincourt's Penguin classics effort loses style points compared to Rawlinson, and yet manages to perhaps be even a bit further from the Greek. Waterfield's Oxford classics just reads as flat and featureless as the Wall Street Journal's finance pages, and yet isn't very close to the Greek either! Grene alone seems to open a contemporary English speaker's ears to hear how Herodotus would sound if you were actually a Greek speaker of the 5th century BC (and isn't that exactly what we want our translators to do for us?). I like his point that with the Homeric overtones, Herodotus should sound just a bit "odd" a little archaic, yet lively. I think Grene hit the mark right on the head, and of course Herodotus himself is a gas. Totally entertaining, and highly recommended.

On a side note, does anyone know how to pronounce Mr. Grene's name? I realize he's Irish, but it's an unusal name and I've never heard it pronounced...

David Grene's translation of Herodotus' "The History" is a good version of the Greek historian's magnum opus.

The Introduction provides context for the translation to come. It is useful and functional, although Knox' introductions to The Iliad and The Odyssey (Fagles' translations) strike me as better at putting the work in its place. Nonetheless, the Introduction is serviceable. Grene notes of Herodotus' work that" "There are two worlds of meaning that are constantly in Herodotus' head. The one is that of human calculation, reason, cleverness, passion, happiness. There, one knows what is happening and, more or less, who is the agent of cause. The other is the will of Gods, or fate, or the intervention of daimons."

In the History itself, Herodotus ranges widely geographically, and considers many different countries. With these, he discusses in detail such varied matters as hygiene, sex, culture, animals, religion, geographical features, and so on. He appears to have tried to ascertain as best as he could what the actuality was and what hearsay or rumor was. One of the more interesting examples of this is his effort to understand the role of Helen in the Trojan War (2, 120). Here, he doubts the veracity of Homer's rendering of the causes of the war. He believes that Helen never did go to Troy, because Priam would not have been willing to risk his empire over one woman. At other places, he clearly states the different versions of some incident and then renders his own best judgment as to what he thought the reality was. In short, he did not simply retell tales that he heard. When he is not sure what actually happened, he says so (e.g., 1, 49; 1, 75).

In the end, Herodotus has done a great service for many generations, by putting down, as best he could, his understanding of the history of the various actors of his time and before. The reader will find it difficult to keep all the people and countries straight. The volume features a useful set of maps, providing a sense of the different countries mentioned, as well as the travels of armies on conquests.

The book moves ahead in a majestic trajectory to ultimately describe the Persian-Greek War, with Xerxes leading his great force into Greece. Herodotus provides detail on many aspects of this conflict, which the Greeks eventually won, after battles at Thermopylae, Salamis, and Platea.

For an early effort at history, Herodotus' work is important to be aware of. And Grene's translation makes the work accessible to readers today.

Herodotus is profaned in this translation, which in a misguided attempt to be readable for the masses inserts modern colloquialisms that detract from the oft amusing things Herodotus has to say. For example, I am quite confident there was no idiom that translates directly into "SCOT FREE" from ancient Greek or any other classical language. Clearly, there were ancient phrases that meant essentially the same thing, but since "Scots", in name, did not exist then, Herodotus would not SAY or WRITE anything about or involving the people beyond Hyperborea, unless he was to refer to their "barbarism" in his own unique way. This is just one example of too many where the translator should have attempted to stay closer to an actual rendering. Not everyone reading this admittedly English translation is that rabidly Anglo-centric. This is a book by Herodotus, not some modern man, so it should strive to sound and read like a book written by a 5th century BC Greek historian, not "the guy next door"!

The translator's lot is a difficult one, but Grene went too far in trying to make this readable for "modern" people. The Histories in one edition is not that difficult to read if the print is not crammed and the font is a reasonable size. Using modern phrasing to the extent in the above example is so anachronistic, and so painfully frequent in this translation, that the "modern" language actually DETRACTS from the account where it was so wrongly inserted. Change the font, enlarge the type, split the book in two, but do not monkey with the language!!

For the most part, the book reads well, and there are sections where the translation encourages the readers to feel that they are in, and a part of Herodotus' world -- under his spell, so to speak. Grene should be commended for that. But, just as the reader is truly beginning to absorb what has been passed down for millenia, all too often a modern phrase breaks the flow and the spell is broken. (This is the reading equivalent of the needle scratching across a record effect so aptly used in "Ally McBeal"!)

The edition holds up well as far as the quality of the paperback, which is high. The font and paper quality are excellent, and the binding is superb. The version I own went through quite a bit and still looks quite new. The text is very readable and non-fatiguing, and aside from the modern intrusions is easy to follow. The added notes are generally helpful and are not excessive.

I prefer and recommend the Aubrey de Selincourt translation, which I believe is published by Penguin. The Loeb Editions are also excellent if you are interested in seeing the Greek as you read.

Herodotus is a very interesting author and an even more intriguing as a person, especially considering how little we know about him. Do not allow this highly ethnocentric, overly colloquial translation to dissuade you from reading a VERY interesting account of life 2000+ years ago.

In an attempt to make up the deficiencies of my education, I am currently studying Greek history. This book was wonderful! The translator did an excellent job. The translation is not into what I would consider modern English. It is readable, but not slangy or crude as much of modern speech is. The rabbit trails Herodotus goes on make the History soooo interesting. Plus every now and then, the reader feels like he is absolutely face to face with Herodotus. It's an eerie but joyful feeling to share a common humanity with some dead guy from the 5th century BC. Even people who don't really like history but like a good story should read this book.