Studies in Aetiology and Historical Methodology in Herodotus by Mackenzie Steele Zalin Department of Classical Studies Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ William A. Johnson, Supervisor ___________________________ Carla M. Antonaccio ___________________________ Emily E. Baragwanath ___________________________ Joshua D. Sosin Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Classical Studies in the Graduate School of Duke University 2016 i v ABSTRACT Studies in Aetiology and Historical Methodology in Herodotus by Mackenzie Steele Zalin Department of Classical Studies Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ William A. Johnson, Supervisor ___________________________ Carla M. Antonaccio ___________________________ Emily E. Baragwanath ___________________________ Joshua D. Sosin An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Classical Studies in the Graduate School of Duke University 2016 Copyright by Mackenzie Steele Zalin 2016 Abstract This dissertation interrogates existing scholarly paradigms regarding aetiology in the Histories of Herodotus in order to open up new avenues to approach a complex and varied topic. Since aetiology has mostly been treated as the study of cause and effect in the Histories, this work expands the purview of aetiology to include Herodotus’ explanations of origins more generally. The overarching goal in examining the methodological principles of Herodotean aetiology is to show the extent to which they resonate across the Histories according to their initial development in the proem, especially in those places that seem to deviate from the work’s driving force (i.e. the Persian Wars). Though the focus is on correlating the principles espoused in the proem with their deployment in Herodotus’ ethnographies and other seemingly divergent portions of his work, the dissertation also demonstrates the influence of these principles on some of the more “historical” aspects of the Histories where the struggle between Greeks and barbarians is concerned. The upshot is to make a novel case not only for the programmatic significance of the proem, but also for the cohesion of Herodotean methodology from cover to cover, a perennial concern for scholars of Greek history and historiography. Chapter One illustrates how the proem to the Histories (1.1.0-1.5.3) prefigures Herodotus’ engagement with aetiological discussions throughout the Histories. Chapter Two indicates how the reading of the proem laid out in Chapter One allows for Herodotus’ deployment of aetiology in the Egyptian logos (especially where the pharaoh Psammetichus’ investigation of the origins of Egyptian language, nature, and custom are iv concerned) to be viewed within the methodological continuum of the Histories at large. Chapter Three connects Herodotus’ programmatic interest in the origins of erga (i.e. “works” or “achievements” manifested as monuments and deeds of abstract and concrete sorts) with the patterns addressed in Chapters One and Two. Chapter Four examines aetiological narratives in the Scythian logos and argues through them that this logos is as integral to the Histories as the analogous Egyptian logos studied in Chapter Two. Chapter Five demonstrates how the aetiologies associated with the Greeks’ collaboration with the Persians (i.e. medism) in the lead-up to the battle of Thermopylae recapitulate programmatic patterns isolated in previous chapters and thereby extend the methodological continuum of the Histories beyond the “ethnographic” logoi to some of the most representative “historical” logoi of Herodotus’ work. Chapter Six concludes the dissertation and makes one final case for methodological cohesion by showing the inextricability of the end of the Histories from its beginning. v Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iv Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ ix Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1. Establishing a Paradigm: Aetiology in the Proem to the Histories ................................ 9 1.1 Setting the Stage: the Einleitungssatz ................................................................... 10 1.2 Charting the Difference......................................................................................... 13 1.3 Reconciling the Difference ................................................................................... 19 2. Exemplifying the Egyptian Logos: the Inquiries of Herodotus and Psammetichus ..... 28 2.1 The Bekos Experiment .......................................................................................... 32 2.2 The Nile ................................................................................................................ 48 2.3 Custom .................................................................................................................. 61 3. Bridging the Divide: Ergon, Logos, and Aetiology ...................................................... 70 3.1 Ergon and Logos ................................................................................................... 73 3.2 Iconatrophy ........................................................................................................... 83 4. Same Difference: the Scythian Logos ........................................................................... 99 4.1 The Origins of the Scythians............................................................................... 101 4.2 Geography ........................................................................................................... 113 4.3 Custom ................................................................................................................ 125 4.4 Seeing the Bigger Picture: the Exemplarity of the Sauromatae .......................... 133 5. “Let this statement hold for my entire narrative”: the Medizing Logos ..................... 138 5.1 The Argives ......................................................................................................... 139 vi 5.2 Gelon ................................................................................................................... 153 5.3 The Corcyreans ................................................................................................... 161 5.4 The Cretans ......................................................................................................... 165 6. What’s Past is Prologue: Seeing Aetiology as Teleology ........................................... 171 6.1 Back to the Future: Anticipating a Chronological Paradox ................................ 172 6.2 Coming Full Circle ............................................................................................. 179 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 194 Biography ........................................................................................................................ 218 vii Abbreviations Journal names are abbreviated according to L’année philologique. Modern reference works, ancient authors, and ancient works are abbreviated according to the third edition of the Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford, 1996). viii Acknowledgements After a long journey, it is a great pleasure to acknowledge assistance received on the road to earning the Ph.D. I first wish to extend my most sincere thanks to my advisor, William Johnson, whose unflagging support of all of my endeavors began even before I arrived at Duke University and extended far beyond the confines of the dissertation. To my committee members, Carla Antonaccio, Emily Baragwanath, and Joshua Sosin, I owe a debt of gratitude for guiding me towards ever-greater clarity in my writing and for suggesting many useful paths to follow which I might never have found otherwise. I am also grateful to José González for his advice during the early stages of this project and to Reinhold Bichler and Bruce Lincoln for allowing me to consult unpublished works. The aforementioned are in no way responsible for any of the errors or shortcomings which this work may present. The support I received during the course of my doctoral studies at all levels from Duke University allowed me not only to complete my dissertation in a timely fashion, but also to grow immeasurably as a teacher, scholar, and human being. To this end, the faculty, staff, and graduate students of the Department of Classical Studies deserve special commendation for their collegiality and friendship over the years. I am also pleased to recognize the Graduate School for awarding me two consecutive summer fellowships which afforded months of unobstructed time for writing, and the Perkins Library system for furnishing me with everything I needed for my research. Finally, I would like to thank my teachers, especially Eric Henager, Margie Lotz, Dirk Obbink, David Sick, Nicholas Sturch, and Kim Whittaker Morris, for inspiring me