Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
301 of 309 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Grene wins on the strength of the translation, February 28, 2005
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.
|
|
|
90 of 93 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Father of History...and Tourism, June 24, 2004
The Histories is commonly thought of as the classic chronicle of the great 5th century BCE wars between the underdog confederacy of Greek city-states and the mighty Persian Empire. To the modern reader of military history, this implies an overriding focus on causes, strategy and tactics as well as detailed, extensive descriptions of pivotal battles. Herodotus, commonly referred to as the "father of history," takes a much broader approach with his work. While he does cover the heroic battles of Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis and Plateau, their treatment is surprisingly shallow, with the bulk of the book dedicated to narration of the gathering storm of Persian power and related expository coverage of the many lands, nations and peoples, intrigues, power struggles and heroic achievements of classical times. Contemporary expectations aside, this is a fascinating book, consistently entertaining and, with proper attention to editor John Marincola's notes, highly educational.Herodotus covers a remarkable swath of time and space, ranging from Egyptian pharaohs from c. 3000 BCE to the final expulsion of the Persians from European soil in 479 BCE and from Libya in the west to India in the south to central Asia in the east and Thrace in the north. His recurrent thematic elements include justice through vengeance, the contrast between free and enslaved peoples, the power of the gods as expressed through oracles, the constantly shifting fortunes of mankind and the disastrous consequences of arrogance and excessive pride. Herodotus has been described elsewhere as the world's first tourist, a reflection of his apparently wide travel, fascination with other cultures and careful reporting of wondrous facts from the far corners of the world. His story of the primary conflict is frequently interrupted by discussions of the customs of numerous tribes and peoples. Through these interludes we learn that the Persians get drunk to discuss all important decisions, the Lydians prostitute their daughters to raise money for dowries, the Babylonians bury their dead in honey, the Egyptians bathe in cold water four times per day, the Scythians drink the blood of the first man they kill and the Gyzantes paint themselves red and eat monkeys. Despite his "father of history" title, Herodotus retains several characteristics of earlier oral and written taletellers, including imagined dialogue to lend drama and human texture to events. He is also, whether from poor sources or conscious guesswork, frequently inaccurate in his depictions. To assist the reader in separating fact from fiction and illuminating those issues where scholars disagree, Marincola has in this Penguin Classics edition added an explanatory Introduction and extensive end-notes (627 in total). Reading the notes definitely disrupts the flow of the story but I found them essential to reading The Histories as anything more than a work of fiction. While the Aubrey De Selincourt translation is extremely readable and, as noted above, the Marincola additions are immensely helpful, this edition suffers from a paucity of good maps. The four that are included are very helpful in keeping track of the large number of no longer existing states and peoples and their geographic relation to each other and to natural landmarks. However, there are numerous cities referenced in the text yet not shown on the maps. More significantly, there are no maps to show in detail the settings of the major battles. This omission, combined with Herodotus' rather sketchy rendering, makes it difficult to holistically visualize the battles. Notwithstanding these relatively minor issues, The Histories is highly recommended. It is impossible to read without increasing one's recognition of our heritage of rampant, pervasive superstition and lives lived under the constant threat of violence and deepening one's appreciation of the tenuous nature of liberty.
|
|
|
60 of 63 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A milestone, and recurrent justifications ...., April 22, 2004
"History of the Peloponnesian War" is, superficially, merely an account of a war that happened centuries ago, the Peloponnesian War, between Athenas and Sparta. Of course, you might think that the subject is trivial to you. After all, how important can a book like that be?. Well, if you were to think that, you would be enormously mistaken.To start with, this book is a milestone you need to be aware of. Thucydides, its author, is very possibly the first modern historian. He tried to explain the causes of the Peloponnesian War, without reducing its complexity by saying that the gods had motivated it. Thucydides doesn't follow the easy path; instead, he searches those causes in human nature, and in power. He doesn't weave tales, but tries to write History. It is rather astonishing how objective this Athenian was when he analyzed the war, and all that happened immediately before it. He examines methodically many events, paying special attention to facts. The author also gives his opinion from time to time, but he doesn't judge whether an action is good or evil: he merely shows that those that have power can use it as they see fit. Due to that, Thucydides is called by many the first realist theoretician. I was especially taken aback by how well he expresses his ideas regarding the fact that "power makes right" in the Melian debate. I don't agree with him, but I cannot deny that he makes a powerful case, and that his point of view is shared nowadays by many noteworthy thinkers. It is important to point out that in "History of the Peloponnesian War" you will find a painstaking account of many things that actually happened, but also some speeches that weren't made by the actors, but could have been made by them. To explain that more clearly: Thucydides wrote some political dialogues and monologues that allow us to understand some aspects of the conflict (and many of his ideas) better. The introduction to this edition also highlights that the author sometimes made up some of the speeches (from the data he had), and was present when others were pronounced. My favorite speech is the one made by Pericles, in honor of the men who died during the war. In that discourse, he explains why those men fought and died to defend Athens, and what Athens meant not only for Athenians but also for Greece. This book isn't easy to read, but it is well-worth the effort. The translation is quite good, so that will make your task a little easier. If you don't feel like reading this book all at once, try to read it little by little. The results will be the same, but you won't feel dismayed by the need of finishing it immediately. Also, if you can, try to relate some of Thucydides themes to our modern world. You will find that easier that you might think, and it will make you pay more attention to what you are reading. You are likely to be very surprised, for example, at how similar some of nowaday's justifications for taking advantage of power without paying attention to justice are to those that Thucydides already made a long time ago. On the whole, I highly recommend this book :) Belen Alcat
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Michael Halleran
by Plutarch
by Aeschylus
by Herodotus
