«EIKASMOS » XVIII (2007) The Warlike and the Wary: The council of Xerxes in Hdt. VII 8-11 and some Near Eastern tales * 1. Xerxes ’ council and the contrasting pair of counsellors The coupling of a king or ruler with a wise counsellor is a characteristic and recurring motif in Herodotus ’ work, which has been discussed by several scholars1. It is a hallmark of Herodotean historical thought, a distinctive pattern by which Herodotus shapes and understands history 2. Scholars have proposed various sources of inspiration, which may have contributed to the formation of that favourite Herodotean figure, the wise counsellor. On one hand, the historian may have been influenced by Greek literary models like epic and tragedy, in which counselling figures ( e.g. Nestor and Polydamas in Homer, Teiresias in tragedy) often played important roles 3. On the other hand, the experience from actual life should not be underestimated: advisers doubtless existed and played a part in the court or the entourage of many historical rulers 4. In this essay, I shall discuss one particular episode involving a king and his counsellors, and this will suggest another possible provenance of the motif: the long and rich narrative traditions of the Near East, in which the coupling of king and counsellor (or counsellors) was a standard and widespread narrative pattern, appearing from very old times and occurring in a multitude of tales 5. Those * I thank the editors of «Eikasm ós» for a series of stimulating suggestions, as well as Myrto Garani, Maria Kanellou, Katerina Karvouni and Agis Marinis, for providing me with many useful publications. 1 See Lattimore 1939, 24-35; Bischoff 1965, 302-319; H.R. Immerwahr, Form and Thought in Herodotus , Cleveland 1966, 73-75; Aly 1969, 87, 192, 243, 279s.; Waters 1985, 138s.; Fehling 1989, 203-209. 2 Cf. the remarks of Lattimore 1939, 34s. and Bischoff 1965, 315. 3 This is suggested e.g. by Chiasson 1979, 115, 124-129; Fehling 1989, 203s.; Sa ïd 2002, 122s. Lattimore 1939, 24, 35 also mentions the possibility of tragic influence, but with reservations. 4 See Bischoff 1965, 315; Chiasson 1979, 117; Waters 1985, 139. 5 For this pattern in ancient Near Eastern narratives see my essay O Solomwvn agwnisthv" : Oi agwvne" grivfwn tou basiliav Solomwvnta sthn Palaiav Diaqhvkh kai sthn ellhnistikhv istoriografiva , «Ellhnikav» LIV (2004) 225s., where I give some examples. I shall discuss the pattern more fully in an appendix of my study in preparation Akivcaro". H Dihvghsh tou Acikavr sthn arcaiva Ellavda (Athens, forthcoming). As remarked by S. Niditch and R. Doran, The success story of the wise courtier: a formal approach , «JBL » XCVI (1977) 186, the king sur- rounded by an entourage of advisers is «a constant in the near eastern view of what court is 220 KONSTANTAKOS traditions may have been the ultimate source of inspiration for some Herodotean stories about counsellors, especially those focusing on oriental kings and poten- tates. Behind at least a few of the latter we may detect more or less distant Near Eastern models – tales of the East which must have reached Herodotus in some way and provided him with a nucleus for his own enthralling narratives 6. The episode to be examined here is the council of Xerxes and his Persian dignitaries before the beginning of the Greek war (Hdt. VII 8-11). This has often been regarded as a free composition or invention of Herodotus himself, and it contains indeed many characteristically Herodotean elements in its present form; but I hope to show that a Near Eastern narrative core is also discernible. Here is a synopsis. When Xerxes decides to make an expedition against Athens, he summons the noblest Persians, in order to ask for their opinion and declare his intentions before them (VII 8,1). In his initial speech, he points out that all the previous Persian kings have expanded the state by wars of conquest and that he himself ought not to fall short of their standards; he then announces his plan to throw a bridge over the Hellespont and invade Greece, so as to punish the Athenians for all they have done to the Persians and to his father Dareios. He enumerates the Athe- nians ’ offences (the arson of Sardeis, the battle of Marathon) and stresses that the Persians will acquire great glory if they add Greece to their conquests, since all the living nations will then belong to the Persian empire, which will extend as far as the heaven of Zeus. So, he exhorts the Persian lords to do their best in order to prepare their troops. Finally, he lays the matter for discussion and asks the noble- men to express their views (VII 8, a-d). The next to speak is Mardonios, Xerxes ’ brother-in-law: he praises the king, calling him the best of all Persians, and incites him to go on with the expedition and take due revenge from the Greeks. He argues that the Persian victory is assured: the Greeks have neither a large army nor great power; in addition, they fight in a most thoughtless manner, and so they will not be able to resist Xerxes ’ huge army (VII 9). After that, the rest of the Persian lords remain silent and dare not express an opposing view (VII 10,1). But Artabanos, Xerxes ’ uncle, ventures to speak. He argues against the expedition in Greece, demonstrating in detail how dangerous it is. He points out that the Greeks are excellent warriors, both by land and sea, much superior to the Scythians who have defeated Dareios; the Athenian victory at Marathon provides a token of their courage. If the Greeks overcome the Persians at sea and then sail to the Hellespont and destroy the bridge there, the Persian army will be trapped in Europe and annihilated – a disaster that nearly befell Dareios ’ forces in like » (cf. ibid. 184 and S. Niditch, A Prelude to Biblical Folklore. Underdogs and Tricksters , Urbana-Chicago 2000, 112s.). 6 The possibility of Near Eastern models is also supported by Bauer 1882, 513; Reinhardt 1966, 168-170; Aly 1969, 279s.; F.R. Adrados, History of the Graeco-Latin Fable , I, transl. L.A. Ray, Leiden-Boston-K öln 1999, 336-338; cf. Bischoff 1965, 315. The Warlike and the Wary 221 the Scythian expedition. For these reasons, Artabanos advises Xerxes to think the matter over again, without haste, and warns him of the envy of God against eve- rything that is great and outstanding. Finally, he reproves Mardonios for his reck- less ideas, with which he is trying to carry the king away (VII 10). Xerxes, how- ever, is angered by Artabanos ’ words: he accuses him of cowardice and declares that he will carry out the expedition and punish the Athenians (VII 11). In this episode, the king stands between two opposed, rival counsellors, who offer him conflicting advice 7. It is also worth noting the respective ages of the two counsellors, because these too are in contrast. Mardonios, the son of the Persian nobleman Gobryas, is young. Referring to his assignment in Ionia in 492 BC, Herodotus notes that Mardonios was young at that time (VI 43,1 hJlikivhn te nevo" ejwvn ); so, in the council of VII 8-11, which is supposed to take place eight years later, in 484 8, Mardonios can be imagined as still a relatively young man. We must 7 A similar pattern with contrasted counsellors underlies also some other Herodotean scenes; but there it is much less developed and lacks many of the characteristic details found in Xerxes ’ council. In VIII 67-69, when the Persians have arrived at Athens, Xerxes asks the leaders of the various nations of his army if he must fight a naval battle against the Greeks. All of them say that the battle must take place; only Artemisia advises the king not to fight it, arguing that it is risky and unnecessary. Xerxes, however, follows the view of the majority. In this episode, Artemisia delivers a long speech, expounding her view and arguments. But the counsellors of the opposite side are not shown setting out their opinion at length, not even talking in direct speech: Herodotus notes their standpoint only very briefly, with a single laconic phrase (VIII 68,1 oiJ me;n a[lloi kata; twjuto; gnwvmhn ejxefevronto, keleuvonte" naumacivhn poievesqai ). Similarly, in V 36 Aristagoras, the tyrant of Miletos, holds a council, in order to propose to his comrades his plan of revolt against the Persians. All of them declare that the revolt must be attempted; only Hekataios admonishes them not to fight against the Persian king, pointing out how great is the king ’s power, but he does not convince them. Here none of the counsellors is shown debating at length in direct speech: the side of the majority gets again only a terse phrase (V 36,2 oiJ me;n dh; a[lloi pavnte" gnwvmhn kata; twjuto; ejxefevronto, keleuvonte" ajpivstasqai ), but Hekataios ’ views are also re- ported briefly in indirect speech (V 36,2). Compared, therefore, with the council of Xerxes, in which all the characters deliver lengthy orations, the aforementioned episodes present an abridged or curtailed form of the ‘pattern of contrasted counsellors ’. In essence, only the part of one counsellor is properly developed, while the opposite side is almost obliterated or fused with the counselled ruler. In addition, the aforementioned episodes lack the contrast between young and elder counsellor (or counsellors), which is a distinctive feature of Xerxes ’ council and brings it very close to various Near Eastern tales discussed below. Another interesting deviation is that in V 36 and VIII 67-69 the confrontation takes place between an entire group of counsellors on one side and a single person on the other: a Near Eastern parallel for this variant will be noted below (the war-council of Ahab, I Kings 22,1-38).