What do you think?
Rate this book
Historiae #2
The history of Herodotus — Volume 2
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.
379 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 441
121 people are currently reading
750 people want to read
About the author
Herodotus
1,655 books785 followersHerodotus (Greek: Ηρόδοτος) (c. 484 – c. 425 BC) was a Greek historian and geographer from the Greek city of Halicarnassus, part of the Persian Empire (now Bodrum, Turkey) and a later citizen of Thurii in modern Calabria, Italy. He is known for having written the Histories – a detailed account of the Greco-Persian Wars. Herodotus was the first writer to perform systematic investigation of historical events. He has been described as "The Father of History", a title conferred on him by the ancient Roman orator Marcus Tullius Cicero.
The Histories primarily cover the lives of prominent kings and famous battles such as Marathon, Thermopylae, Artemisium, Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale. His work deviates from the main topics to provide a cultural, ethnographical, geographical, and historiographical background that forms an essential part of the narrative and provides readers with a wellspring of additional information.
Herodotus has been criticized for his inclusion of "legends and fanciful accounts" in his work. The contemporaneous historian Thucydides accused him of making up stories for entertainment. However, Herodotus explained that he reported what he could see and was told. A sizable portion of the Histories has since been confirmed by modern historians and archaeologists.
The Histories primarily cover the lives of prominent kings and famous battles such as Marathon, Thermopylae, Artemisium, Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale. His work deviates from the main topics to provide a cultural, ethnographical, geographical, and historiographical background that forms an essential part of the narrative and provides readers with a wellspring of additional information.
Herodotus has been criticized for his inclusion of "legends and fanciful accounts" in his work. The contemporaneous historian Thucydides accused him of making up stories for entertainment. However, Herodotus explained that he reported what he could see and was told. A sizable portion of the Histories has since been confirmed by modern historians and archaeologists.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
December 15, 2023
من واقعا نمیدونم باید به منابع اولیه چطور امتیاز بدم.
مثلا بیام به نویسندهی دو هزار سال پیش ایراد بگیرم که چرا از شنیدهها قضاوت کردی؟ یا چرا مثل تاریخ نگار امروزی نبودی؟
یا بیام بهش بگم دمت گرم؟
یا خرده بگیرم که فلان حرفت رد شده؟
نمیدونم🤷🏻♀️
در نتیجه فقط دربارهی ترجمهش میگم که بسیار خوبه.
و تاکید میکنم که تاریخ رو نمیشه از روی یک منبع خوند و فهمید. باید خیلی منابع اولیه و ثانویه رو بخونید تا یک کمی دستتون بیاد که دنیا از چه قرار بود.
مثلا بیام به نویسندهی دو هزار سال پیش ایراد بگیرم که چرا از شنیدهها قضاوت کردی؟ یا چرا مثل تاریخ نگار امروزی نبودی؟
یا بیام بهش بگم دمت گرم؟
یا خرده بگیرم که فلان حرفت رد شده؟
نمیدونم🤷🏻♀️
در نتیجه فقط دربارهی ترجمهش میگم که بسیار خوبه.
و تاکید میکنم که تاریخ رو نمیشه از روی یک منبع خوند و فهمید. باید خیلی منابع اولیه و ثانویه رو بخونید تا یک کمی دستتون بیاد که دنیا از چه قرار بود.
March 23, 2023
اگه همین هرودوت نبود هیچ چیزی از تاریخ هخامنشی نمی دونستیم
پس دمش گرم
پس دمش گرم
August 13, 2020
Kā man patika tā grieķu senvēsture.
Tur varēja uzzināt par to, ka demokrātijā ir normāli visus citus čakarēt, jo samelot daudziem ir vieglāk kā vienam.
Mūsdienu "vecpuišu & vecmeitu" realitātes šovs tika izgudrots apmēram 480 p.m.ē, kur kādas hellēņu valstiņas karalis gadu vēroja pie sevis savāktos meitas potenciālos vīrus.
Slikta dejotprasme nav goda lieta un var maksāt sievu un karaļvalsti.
Breikdance bija izgudrots jau tad, tomēr tas noteikti nebija stilīgi. Galvenais precinieks pirms uzvarētāja paziņošanas piemetās un izlēma uzdejot nostājoties uz galvas, tirinot kājas gaisā.
Orākuli un pareģi sasodīti efktīvi veica savu darbu(ko viņi tagad nerullē?).
Karošana bija nebeidzams dzīvesstils.
Tirāne Artemīsija nu gan bija viena sasodīti braša sieviete!
Es gan netīšām paņēmu grāmatas otro daļu, tā ka pirmā daļa vēl būs jāizlasa. Ceru uz ko tikpat jestru.
Tur varēja uzzināt par to, ka demokrātijā ir normāli visus citus čakarēt, jo samelot daudziem ir vieglāk kā vienam.
Mūsdienu "vecpuišu & vecmeitu" realitātes šovs tika izgudrots apmēram 480 p.m.ē, kur kādas hellēņu valstiņas karalis gadu vēroja pie sevis savāktos meitas potenciālos vīrus.
Slikta dejotprasme nav goda lieta un var maksāt sievu un karaļvalsti.
Breikdance bija izgudrots jau tad, tomēr tas noteikti nebija stilīgi. Galvenais precinieks pirms uzvarētāja paziņošanas piemetās un izlēma uzdejot nostājoties uz galvas, tirinot kājas gaisā.
Orākuli un pareģi sasodīti efktīvi veica savu darbu(ko viņi tagad nerullē?).
Karošana bija nebeidzams dzīvesstils.
Tirāne Artemīsija nu gan bija viena sasodīti braša sieviete!
Es gan netīšām paņēmu grāmatas otro daļu, tā ka pirmā daļa vēl būs jāizlasa. Ceru uz ko tikpat jestru.
August 15, 2022
I however am bound to report that which is reported, though I am not bound altogether to believe it. And let this saying be considered to hold good as regards every narrative in the history.
Given this admission, had Herodotus been a judge he would have no trouble admitting any and all hearsay evidence, which I cannot but decry as a faulty premise for any work of ‘history’ and indeed presents such a dire error as to reduce his work from that status to those of ‘stories’.
Still, this volume is much superior to the first volume, since Herodotus here recounts all the stories he’d heard about the invasion of Greece by Xerxes and his Persian forces. While I still find his reliance on hearsay an unforgivable sin in any work with the word ‘history’ in its title, at least this book had some flow to it, as opposed to the ‘O yea, before I forget I’ve got to tell you about’ pattern of disorganization that seemed to plague the first volume.
A major highlight was Xerxes looking out over his massive forces which have assembled in order to conquer the Hellenes and remarking to his lieutenant Artobanes that in a hundred years all of these men, now about to quite possibly meet their death, will not even be remembered at all, let alone for what they are about to do in the present war. To which his friend replies that yes, this is true, but one should also recognize that each one of them had in all likelihood at one time or other wished that they were dead. Such despondent musings on the futility of human endeavour seem to raise this work from a mere one-damn-fact-after-another narrative to something approaching philosophy.
Prior to this, Xerxes had delivered a five page speech detailing all of his reasons for invading Greece, to which Artobanes had replied with a ten page speech arguing against such an undertaking. Then, Xerxes dreamed one night that a vision told him that Persia would be ruined if he did not invade. This seemed to settle the issue until the next night, another vision told him the opposite. Explaining the resultant dilemma to Artobanes, Xerxes had his colleague dress in the his clothes, sit on his throne and that night, sleep in his bed. When the next morning Artobanes reported that he’d had a vision counselling invasion, the issue was finally decided. As with their constantly relying on the prognostications of oracles, the people of Herodotus’ time seem to have a totally unrealistic belief in the power of such fantasies.
There is still, at the best points, a tendency in this work to fall into the same rut with which I found my wheels spinning while reading Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War: too many trees, not enough forest. As just one example, it is quite diverting how Artemesia while escaping from an Athenian ship, rammed and sunk a ship of an ally and manages to fool Xerxes into believing she’d done something heroic against the enemy, but this little story was nowhere fitted into a larger interpretation of what the whole affair was really about. Personal glory, cowardice, ambition, treachery: they are all here, but where are the larger interpretations of dynastic, political or military forces at work behind the actions of these individuals?
Many, many little stories attract interest. The repeated treacheries of Themistocles, the father who tore out the eyes of all six sons who disobeyed him and went with Xerxes, Cleomenes going mad, the sea monsters around Mt. Athos which prey on the men in the water from destroyed ships, Panionius’ brutal castration of prisoners, the way in which Hermotimos deals with this and Cambyses making thongs out of the flayed skin of a judge he’s executed: all attract momentary interest but fail to be interwoven with each other in any interpretive framework. Again, stories, not history.
There is, almost as an afterthought, some interpretation. The Athenians were judged to have fought better after throwing off despotic controls, since ‘When they were kept down they were willfully slack, because they were working for a master, whereas when they had been set free each one was eager to achieve something for himself.’ However, such glimpses of general forces developing were few and far between.
Focusing on the four main encounters of Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis and Plataia understanding of what these supposed turning points represented would have been vastly improved had the simple expedient of a general comparison of relative strengths both before and after the battles been included, rather than so much focus on individual encounters and heroic achievements of personalities. Also, the translator/editors could have added a map or two along the way to make things more intelligible.
Overall, not bad, but I’m glad my reading of it is finally over.
Given this admission, had Herodotus been a judge he would have no trouble admitting any and all hearsay evidence, which I cannot but decry as a faulty premise for any work of ‘history’ and indeed presents such a dire error as to reduce his work from that status to those of ‘stories’.
Still, this volume is much superior to the first volume, since Herodotus here recounts all the stories he’d heard about the invasion of Greece by Xerxes and his Persian forces. While I still find his reliance on hearsay an unforgivable sin in any work with the word ‘history’ in its title, at least this book had some flow to it, as opposed to the ‘O yea, before I forget I’ve got to tell you about’ pattern of disorganization that seemed to plague the first volume.
A major highlight was Xerxes looking out over his massive forces which have assembled in order to conquer the Hellenes and remarking to his lieutenant Artobanes that in a hundred years all of these men, now about to quite possibly meet their death, will not even be remembered at all, let alone for what they are about to do in the present war. To which his friend replies that yes, this is true, but one should also recognize that each one of them had in all likelihood at one time or other wished that they were dead. Such despondent musings on the futility of human endeavour seem to raise this work from a mere one-damn-fact-after-another narrative to something approaching philosophy.
Prior to this, Xerxes had delivered a five page speech detailing all of his reasons for invading Greece, to which Artobanes had replied with a ten page speech arguing against such an undertaking. Then, Xerxes dreamed one night that a vision told him that Persia would be ruined if he did not invade. This seemed to settle the issue until the next night, another vision told him the opposite. Explaining the resultant dilemma to Artobanes, Xerxes had his colleague dress in the his clothes, sit on his throne and that night, sleep in his bed. When the next morning Artobanes reported that he’d had a vision counselling invasion, the issue was finally decided. As with their constantly relying on the prognostications of oracles, the people of Herodotus’ time seem to have a totally unrealistic belief in the power of such fantasies.
There is still, at the best points, a tendency in this work to fall into the same rut with which I found my wheels spinning while reading Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War: too many trees, not enough forest. As just one example, it is quite diverting how Artemesia while escaping from an Athenian ship, rammed and sunk a ship of an ally and manages to fool Xerxes into believing she’d done something heroic against the enemy, but this little story was nowhere fitted into a larger interpretation of what the whole affair was really about. Personal glory, cowardice, ambition, treachery: they are all here, but where are the larger interpretations of dynastic, political or military forces at work behind the actions of these individuals?
Many, many little stories attract interest. The repeated treacheries of Themistocles, the father who tore out the eyes of all six sons who disobeyed him and went with Xerxes, Cleomenes going mad, the sea monsters around Mt. Athos which prey on the men in the water from destroyed ships, Panionius’ brutal castration of prisoners, the way in which Hermotimos deals with this and Cambyses making thongs out of the flayed skin of a judge he’s executed: all attract momentary interest but fail to be interwoven with each other in any interpretive framework. Again, stories, not history.
There is, almost as an afterthought, some interpretation. The Athenians were judged to have fought better after throwing off despotic controls, since ‘When they were kept down they were willfully slack, because they were working for a master, whereas when they had been set free each one was eager to achieve something for himself.’ However, such glimpses of general forces developing were few and far between.
Focusing on the four main encounters of Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis and Plataia understanding of what these supposed turning points represented would have been vastly improved had the simple expedient of a general comparison of relative strengths both before and after the battles been included, rather than so much focus on individual encounters and heroic achievements of personalities. Also, the translator/editors could have added a map or two along the way to make things more intelligible.
Overall, not bad, but I’m glad my reading of it is finally over.
August 15, 2020
Marriage, wars, politics, betrayal, foreign affairs, everything is induced and in detail. Amazing work and rather objective. I like the most the tradition of Libya woman, for each man they slept with, they added a garment on top of her, the more, the more respected.
May 10, 2015
Важи углавном исто као за први дио, с тим да је комплетна књига посвећена Грчко-персијском рату, тако да нема описа егзотичних варварских цивилизација. Херодот улази у апсолутно најситније детаље, како око самих битака (која јединица се закрвила с којом на којој ливади, ко је командовао, ко је рикнуо, ко је преживио...), тако и око околних дешавања. Велики је посао био уједињавање иначе хетерогених грчких племена око заједничког добра, али такође и Персијанци нису били без својих проблема - и они су теглили армију састављену од разних фракција, од којих су многе ишле у рат присилно, тако да је питање било колико може да им се вјерује. Пророчанства су и даље ту, али на томе се натприродни елементи завршавају. Недостају и дворске интриге и преваре, осим једне сочне анегдоте везане за Ксеркса и кћерку његовог брата након повратка из Грчке. Да поновим што сам већ закључио у првом дијелу - ово је непропустиво штиво, не само због непроцјењиве образовне вриједности, већ и због ријетко виђене забавности у књигама овог типа.
May 8, 2014
As with Herodotus' other works, this varied between fascinating accounts and more tedious material. It was mainly about the Persian empire's campaign against Athens, after they had conquered most of the city-states in modern Greece and Turkey, besides the Middle East and Egypt. I really liked the way this ancient told about war because it was often visual, settings and people described. In fact, I'm surprised there wasn't a blockbuster film of this - maybe there was and I don't know. The description of the armies that marched with Xerxes into Greece was incredible - a much bigger cast than Cleopatra going into Rome. The Greeks thought that Xerxes was Zeus come down to earth and most submitted. The Athenians didn't think that and tried to persuade others to accept that Xerxes was a mortal man.
Funny stuff like that and then the Athenian response to all this. It seemed impossible but they won the naval battle, and perhaps because they could swim while the Persians perished if they fell into the water. The attitude of the Athenians towards the woman ship commander from one of the countries Persia controlled - ha. Anyway, their tactics turned out to be Herculean, waylaying the Persian army until they had no more supplies or food, kind of like Russia with Napoleon. I don't usually enjoy war stories but this was so colorfully told. I had never known the particulars so it was compelling for me. I often enjoy these ancient works, and read one every few years or so. So others might not like the style and time.
Funny stuff like that and then the Athenian response to all this. It seemed impossible but they won the naval battle, and perhaps because they could swim while the Persians perished if they fell into the water. The attitude of the Athenians towards the woman ship commander from one of the countries Persia controlled - ha. Anyway, their tactics turned out to be Herculean, waylaying the Persian army until they had no more supplies or food, kind of like Russia with Napoleon. I don't usually enjoy war stories but this was so colorfully told. I had never known the particulars so it was compelling for me. I often enjoy these ancient works, and read one every few years or so. So others might not like the style and time.
April 29, 2020
Not as interesting as Volume 1.
Volume 2 starts off very promising, describing how a certain subset of very strong people get milk from stallions, but then goes on to describe too much of rivers and landscapes and not so much peoples' cultures. I was excited at the mention of Athens and Sparta, but I found the descriptions of these people lacking.
Lots of war, lots of names. All in all, a great account of history I GUESS, but not fun.
Volume 2 starts off very promising, describing how a certain subset of very strong people get milk from stallions, but then goes on to describe too much of rivers and landscapes and not so much peoples' cultures. I was excited at the mention of Athens and Sparta, but I found the descriptions of these people lacking.
Lots of war, lots of names. All in all, a great account of history I GUESS, but not fun.
January 24, 2018
Challenging but rewarding read
Good for rudimentary knowledge in Greek history. Foretells the events leading up to the war between the Greeks and the Persians.
Good for rudimentary knowledge in Greek history. Foretells the events leading up to the war between the Greeks and the Persians.
February 15, 2023
Cool second book, also can see how this eventually led to the peloponnesian war
December 28, 2023
Review?
April 10, 2024
Jam packed with zany adventures. A must read!
July 29, 2023
A grci, kad su donijeli odluku da ne progone dalje barbarske brodove i ne plove prema Helespontu radi rušenja mostova, počeli su opsjedati Andar s namjerom da ga osvoje. Naime, Andrani prvi od svih otočana nisu dali novac kad ga je Temistoklo zatražio, već su - pošto je Temistoklo kao razlog navodio to da su Atenjani došli u pratnji dvaju moćnih bogova, Nagovora i Prisile, pa im oni svakako moraju dati novac - odgovorili na to riječima kako je Atena s pravom velika i bogata kad je pod zaštitom tako vrsnih bogova, dok su Andrani siromašni zemljom i do krajnosti bijedni, pa dva beskorisna boga ne puštaju njihov otok nego na njemu neprestano rado borave; to su Siromaštvo i Nemoć, pa ako Andrani raspolažu jedino tim dvama božanstvima, neće dati novac, jer moć Atene nije ništa jača od njihove nemoći.
October 6, 2015
Most books I read I polish off in a few days, but these 2 volumes of the Histories of Herodotus took me together about 2.5 months. This is due to his style, and to the ancient sentence structure, and the many lists of unfamiliar names and places. To read Herodotus is to plunge yourself deep into ancient times. He does a good job of distinguishing between what he knows as fact, and what he's heard but is not sure he believes himself. He focuses on the wars between the Persians and the Greeks of 2500 years ago. Along the way, he tells much of the customs and beliefs of the many peoples of the era. One thing in particular I found fascinating was how no one from either side of the conflict would make a move without consulting an Oracle first. Yet the main function of Oracles seemed to be to foretell accurate predictions in such a way as to trick men into thinking just the opposite of what was to happen. For example, one king asked the Oracle - if he started a war, would he rule for a long time? The Oracle told him he would rule until men grew their hair long. Since no men did that, he felt confident he would rule for a long time. A short time later, who shows up but an army of angry long-haired men, who defeat him.
October 30, 2016
I have done nothing but a speed-reading of this book which dealt mostly with Egyptian's geography, history, religious practice. The only part that is interesting to this reader is how the Greek had imported the gods and goddesses from Egypt and refashioned them into their own mythology. The funeral practice is morbidly fascinating as well. The rest are boatloads of names and locations.
January 9, 2017
Volume 2 of the Histories includes the accounts of the famous battles at Thermopylae and Salamis. It's interesting that while the graphic novel/movie 300 is intensely fictional, there are many details that come right from the account of Herodotus concerning the battle at Thermopylae.
January 22, 2017
Awesome!
I would definitely recommend this amazing book and it provides a glimpse into our past lives as humans. I find it to believable and though.
I would definitely recommend this amazing book and it provides a glimpse into our past lives as humans. I find it to believable and though.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews