Skip to main content

Full text of "Herodotus in the Greek renascence"

See other formats





.sX.<rWv\& ft.ftrt/fijLv^ 

Class ' 








JUNE, 1898, 








I. The Direct Influence of Ancient Writers upon the Renascence... ........ 1 

A study of Asianism and Atticism, the Period from the Death of 
Alexander to Dionysios of Halicarnassos. 

II. Greek and Roman Estimates of Herodotos ...................................... 4 

Quotations from Aristotle, Cicero, Dionysios of Halicarnassos, Dio 
Chrysostom, Quintilian, Lucian, Greek Rhetoricians. 

HI. Dio Chrysostom, Arrian, Aelian, Philostratos .................................. 8 

IV. Lucian Aets elpo^evrj ................................................................. 16 

Introductory Remarks upon Lucian. A Study of Herodotos' \Qu 
flpofjievT). A Study of Lucian's Coordinate and Subordinate Con- 
junctions and Particles, /caf, rc-Kai, /*eV, 8c, ydp, 5^, '/va, &s. 

V. Lucian His Periodology ............................................................. 25 

With a Study, De Verborum Ubertate, and a Consideration of the 
Question, Whether opetTijs or ir\ayiao-fji.6s Is Preferred. 

VI. Lucian His Language, Constructions, Material .............................. 32 

1 1.7339 


1. Quotations from Aristotle, Cicero, Dionysios of Halicarnassos, Dio Chrysostom, 

Quintilian, Lucian, Greek Rhetoricians. 

2. References to Grammars : Kriiger, Kiihner, Matthiae. 

3. References to Editions of Herodotos : Stein, Merriam, etc. 

4. References to Editions of Lucian: Bekker, Dindorf, Jacobitz, Reitz, Som- 

merbrodt, etc. 

5. Other Literature in Alphabetical Order 

Allinson, American Journal of Philology, 7. 203 ff. 

Bernhardy, Wissenschaftliche Syntax, pp. 306, 486, etc. 

Blass, Die griechische Beredsamkeit in dem Zeitraum von Alexander bis 

auf Augustus. 

Boldermann, Studea Lucian ea, 1893. 
Cobet, Mnemosyne, N. S., 5-98. 
Croiset, Vie et Oeuvres de Lucien, 1892. 
Du Mesnil, Grammatica, Quam Lucianus in Scriptis Suis Secutus Est, Ratio 

cum Antiquorum Atticorum Ratione Comparatur. 
Forstemann, De Vocabulis Quae Videntur Esse apud Herodotum Poeticis. 

Gildersleeve, Amer. Jour. Phil., 1. 47; 4. 92, 416; 6. 53, 68, 262; 9. 141, 

150, etc. ; Pindar, Introd., p. cix ; Justin Martyr, 1 C. 6. 7. 
Grundmann, Quid in Elocutione Arriani Herodoto Debeatur, 1884. 
Guttentag, De Subdito Qui inter Lucianeos Legi Solet Dialogo Toxaride. 
Heller, Die Absichtssatze bei Lucian, 'Iva, us, tiirus. 
Hoffmann, De Articularum Nonnullarum apud Herodotum Usu. 
Jebb, The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus. 
Kalinka, Dissertationes Philologae Vindobonenses. 
Lundberg, De Ratione Herodotea Praepositionibus Utendi a Scriptoribus 

Atticis Diversa, 1869. 

Mees, De Luciani Studiis et Scriptis Juvenilibus, 1841. 
Miiller, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur (Donaldson's Translation). 
Norden, Die antike Kunstposa. 
Planck, Quaestiones Lucianeae, 1850. 
Rabasti, Quid Comicis Debuerit Lucianus, 1865. 
Robertson, The Gorgianic Figures in Early Greek Prose. 
Sagawe, 5e im Nachsatz bei Herodot, 1893. 
Schmid, Atticismus (entire). 
Schulze, Quae Ratio Intercedat inter Lucianum et Comicos Graecorum 

Poeticis, 1892. 

Smyth, Sounds and Inflections of the Greek Dialects. 
Ziegeler, De Luciano Poetarum Judice et Imitatore, 1872. 

Daniel Allen Penick was born in Cabarrus County, 
North Carolina, September 7, 1869. He received meager 
early training until, at the age of fourteen, he began reg- 
ular attendance in the public schools at Austin, Texas. 
After graduation from the Austin High School, he entered 
he University of Texas in 1887, and received the degree 
of Bachelor of Arts in 1891. The year following he was 
fellow in Latin and at the end of the year took the degree 
of Master of Arts in Greek, Latin and Philosophy. In 
1892-3 he was Assistant Principal of the High School 
at Paris, Texas. In 1893-4 he was Professor of Greek and 
Latin in Daniel Baker College, Brownwood, Texas. Be- 
ginning in the fall of 1894 he pursued courses in Greek, 
Latin and Sanscrit at Johns Hopkins University. Here 
he was appointed University scholar and fellow in Greek, 
and in 1898 received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 
He attended the lectures of Professors Gildersleeve, War- 
ren, Bloomfield, Smith, Miller, Spieker and Vos, to ail of 
whom he takes this opportunity of acknowledging a debt of 
abiding gratitude. 


The writer desires to acknowledge his deep indebtedness to Professor 
Gildersleeve not alone for suggestion and direction on the present 
work and for incomparably patient and illuminating instruction 
through a period of four years, but also for that which is inestimably 
greater, an inspiration to true manhood and true scholarship, the 
pursuit of which will, throughout life, strengthen and ennoble, though 
the goal set may never be reached. He would also express here his 
gratitude to Professor Minton "Warren, late head of the Latin depart- 
ment at Johns Hopkins, and to Professor Maurice Bloomfield, and 
emphasize his lasting obligation to them for helpful guidance and 

Aug. 16, 1902. 




That writers of the Greek Renascence are much indebted to 
older authorities is an undisputed fact. But it is not so clear who 
the older authorities are possibly all the classic writers down 
through the ten orators, or Homer, Herodotos, Early Comedy. 
There are those who say that this influence was through later 
writers who were themselves indebted to the old masters. 
Especially is it claimed for any who might have used Herodotos, 
that the authority was rather Ephoros and Theopompos, or even 
writers still later. To refute this latter position, it is necessary 
to study the history of prose composition between the two periods, 
the decadence and the revival, the fall and the rise in the ex- 
cellence of composition. Blass 1 has compiled and elaborated 
Dionysios of Halicarnassos, Cicero, and Quintilian. 2 The desig- 
nating terms, Atticism and Asianism, mean respectively Attic 
simplicity and a departure therefrom, so called not from any 
Asiatic influence, but from the fact that during the prevalence 
of Asianism the greatest literary activity was in Asia Minor, 
though the demoralization was prevalent in all Greek com- 
munities, having originated probably at Athens. "The Old 
Oratory was an art, and was therefore based upon a theory. 
The New Oratory was a knack, and was founded upon practice." 
The mention of oratory is significant, for it must be noted that 

7 Die Griechische Beredsamkeit in dem Zeitraum von Alexander bis auf 
* Cf. Jebb, The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus, 2, C. 24. 


2 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

the whole development of which we are treating was, as Schmid l 
has clearly pointed out, through the department of oratory rather 
than through philosophy or poetry, and the terms Atticism and 
Asianism must be so understood, though the developments through 
these influences were by no means confined to one department. 

What is the period of this Asianism ? Roughly speaking, from 
300 to 100 B. c., part of which is shrouded in darkness. 2 17 /JLCV 
dp^aia /ecu <fcXoero<o9 prjropLKrj .... dp^a/j,ev7j JJLCV CLTTO Trj? 
*A.\et;dvSpov rov Ma/ceSpz'09 reXevrf]? e/cTrveiv KOI fjuapaivecrOai 
/car o\iryov, eVl Se TT}? /cad' r]^a^ ^Xt/aa? jjui/cpov Se^cracra e/9 
re\o9 rjfyavia-Oai. In accordance with this, Cicero says 3 of De- 
metrius : Hie primus inflexit orationem, and Quintilian : 4 quin 
etiam Phalerea ilium Demetrium, quamquam is primus inclinasse 
dicitur, multum ingenii habuisse et facundiae fateor. Demetrius 
flourished from 320 B. c. His style was ornate, luxurious, artificial. 5 
History was more influenced by the school of Isocrates. The 
representative of decline in this school was the Isocratean, Cal- 
listhenes, who flourished at the time of Alexander. Omitting 
others, we find Asianism fully developed in Hegesias about 270 
B.C., whom Strabo 6 wrongly calls the founder of Asianism. He 
was consciously opposed to Attic Oratory, though Lysianic diction 
can be detected in his short, choppy, oratorical style. 7 But in 
his historical works there is more splendor, more ornamentation : 8 
TTJV e/JL/jberpov teal evpvO^iov \eiv, o>9 ra TroXXa rcov 'Hyrjffiov 
rov prfTopos /cal TQ>V ' Kdiavtov /caXovfievcov prjropwv. 9 These two 
styles the pointed and choppy and the flowing and ornate con- 
tinued for two centuries, going from bad to worse. Omitting 
further reference to this development, we turn to the reaction in 
favor of Atticism, which seems to have begun with Hermagoras 
of Temnos about 110 B. c. 10 Volkmann also 11 furnishes abundant 

1 Uber den Kulturgeschichtlichen Zusammenhang und die Bedeutung der 
Griechischen Renaissance in der Romerzeit. 
* V. Dionysios of Halicarnassos, De Oratoribus Antiquis I. 
Brutus, 38. * 10. 1. 80. 6 V. Cicero, Orator, 92. 

e C. 648. 7 Cf. Cicero, Brutus 286, Orat. 226, 230. 

8 Cf. Theon, Progymnasraata, Sp. 2. 71. 9. 
Cf. Dion. Hal., De Composition^ 4 and 18. 

10 V. Blass, Gr. Bered., p. 85. 

11 Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Romer. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 3 

evidence that Hermagoras followed regular rhetorical divisions 
in his work instead of making use, like his immediate predecessors, 
of what came to him solely in practical experience, and that the 
Asianic style of oratory, which was without technical science, 
began to be changed first about the middle or end of the second 
century B. c. by Hermagoras, a technologist of the first rank, 
who united theory and practice in a most praiseworthy manner. 
Schmid 1 claims that the reaction originated first in the island 
of Rhodes and that Apollonios and Molon tried not so much to 
oppose Asianism as to dampen the prevailing spirit of exaggeration. 
In 92 B. c. L. Plotius opened a school of rhetoric in Rome, which 
<3ate may mark the watershed. At that time Hortensius was the 
representative of Asianism in Latin, having "combined its two 
manners, sententious point and florid declamation." Cicero himself 
was partly under the influence of this school, but as representative 
of the Atticisirig style he may claim the credit of destroying the 
ultra Asianism of Hortensius and later of leaning toward the 
Attic. His inborn sense of strength and aptness made him strike 
a medium and avoid the extreme rigorousness of the Atticists. 
This success of the Romans forced the Greek writers of the time 
to try to shape a new prose literature. Revived Atticism proper 
may be said to date from Calvus, about 60 B. c., being completed, 
in a sense, in Dionysios of Halicarnassos and Caecilius. Of course 
there were various schools of Atticists, imitators of Thucydides, 
Xenophon, Lysias, Hyperides, Demosthenes, all of them drawing 
more or less from Greek literature as a whole or from certain 
departments of it in keeping with their style and subject of 

This is sufficient to show that such writers as Dio Chrysostom 
and Lucian could have imitated no writer after 320 B.C. But 
there has been no mention of JEphoros and Theopompos. Recall 
the fact that Callisthenes, the Isocratean, the first historical repre- 
sentative of Asianism, was a contemporary of Alexander. Add 
to this that both Ephoros and Theopompos were pupils of Isocrates, 
that both were contemporaries of Alexander, the latter quite a 
favorite. Certainly no one could contend that Ephoros and 

1 V. note 1, p. 2. 

4 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Theopompos were exponents of the Asianic style, but we must 
recognize that within two or three decades after they flourished 
Asianism was fully developed : such changes must come about 
gradually. Dionysios of Halicarnassos l says of Theopompos : 
el 8* vTrepelSev ev TOVTOIS, e<* ot? paXivT av eo-TrovSaice, rfj? 
re <rvfjL7r\OKi}s rcov <f>o)vr)evT(t)v ypa/^/jLarcov /cal rfjs KV/c\i,fcfjs 
evpvO/jLuas TWV TrepioSwv teal rr}? ojj,oL$ela<; T&V oxy/jLaTKr/jLcov, 
TTO\V afjLiva)v av rjv avros eavrov tcara rrjv <f>pda-tv. 2 Even if 
it be denied that these two writers show signs of Asianism, the 
fact that they are ultra-Isocratean would preclude the possibility 
of confusing their influence with the influence of Herodotos, 
though they themselves may have been largely indebted to 


Since it is true that imitation was the main element of strength 
in the Renascence, there must be a study of imitation, of the 
writers imitated, of the basis of imitation, of the degree and the 
success of imitation. Such studies have been numerous for almost 
every field of literary composition : after the revival was begun 
through the department of oratory and each of the more important 
orators had a considerable following, other styles of composition 
on other than oratorical subjects found other sources from which 
to draw. Much has been written of the influence of Homer, of 
the comic poets, of Plato. Herodotos has received little attention. 
The reasons for studying Herodotos in this connection are based 
not only upon the results to be presented in the following chapters, 
but also upon the opinions of classical writers themselves from 
the time of Aristotle through the Renascence, including the 
Rhetoricians, who, by their studies and criticisms, have given 
many points of individuality in Herodotos worthy of imitation. 
Observe a few of their statements. 

J Ad On. Pomp. 6. 2 Cf. Cicero, Orat. 151. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 5 

Aristotle's all-important statement 1 is the basis of a fundamental 
imitation of Herodotos : rrjv Se Xef iv dvdjKT) elvai, % elpofjLevrjv 
Kal TW crvvSea/jLtt) jj,iav, coo-rrep al ev rofc SiOvpafjuftoi,*; dvaj3o\at, t 
rj KaTO"Tpa/jLfjLevrjv Kal o/jLoiav rais rcov dp^aLwv TTOCTJTWV dvTi- 
o-T/000049. 'n pev ovv elpofievr] Xeffc9 tf dp^aia eirriv 'HpoBoTOV 
ovpiov 776 lo-TOpLr]^ aTroBe^if;' ravrrj yap Trporepov pev airavres, 
vvv Se ov TroXXot ^pSyvrai. 

Cicero says : 2 apud Herodotum patrem historiae et apud Theo- 
pompum suut innumerabiles fabulae ; also, 3 tanta est eloquentia, 
ut me quidem, quantum ego Graece scripta intellegere possum, 
magno opere delectet; and, 4 quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius. 
Then he particularizes : 5 alter (H.) enim sine ullis salebris quasi 
sedatus amnis fluit ; and, 6 itaque et Herodotus et eadem superiorque 
aetas numero caruit (this statement is contradicted by Quintilian). 
Add : 7 si quae veteres illi (H. et . .) apte numeroseque dixerunl, 
ea [sic] non numero quaesito, sed verborum collocatione ceciderunt. 

Dionysius 8 has much to say of Herodotos by way of comparison 
with Thucydides. After speaking of Herodotos' vTroOecn,? and 
selection, he says : f) ^ev 'HpoSorou Sta#e<79 ev anracriv eTriei/crfs, 
Kal rot? fjbev dryadoi? a-vvrjSo/jLevrj, rofc Se /ca/cols (rvva\>yovo'a. 
Again, 77 icaOapa rot9 ovo/juacri, Kal rbv < ^Ckf]ViKov %apaKT7jpa 
<rq>ovcra Sta\e/cro9. Herodotos excels likewise in evdpyeia, 77801/7;, 
Add : dperwv 77 KVpifordrr} TO Trpenrov ravryv 6 'H/ooSoTO9 
fjua\\ov 77 ovKvSiS'rjs, and : t,a$epovcri &e Kara rovro 
fj,d\io-ra d\\r)\cov, OTI TO pev 'HpoSoTOV /ca\\O9 i\apov 
fyoftepov Be TO ovKvSi$ov, and : in/ro9 Se Kal #aXXo9 Kal 
vrpeTreiav Kal TO \ey6fievov tSto)9 7r\d<rfjLa lo-TopiKov f HpoSoro9 e%et. 9 

Strabo 10 refers to Herodotos frequently and classes him as to 
trustworthiness with Hesiod, Homer, the tragedians. 

Pliny cites him in many places as an authority. 

Quintilian says : n dulcis et candidus et fusus Herodotus, remissis 
adfectibus melior, sermonibus, voluptate. Note especially : 12 et 
historiae, quae currere debet ac ferri, minus convenissent insistentes 

1 Ars Rhetorica, 3. 9. * De Legibus, 1. 1. 5. * De Oratore, 2. 55. 

4 Fragment, 2. 49. 6 Orator, 39. Ib., 186. 7 Ib., 219. 

Cf. Ad Cn. Pomp., Usener's edition, pp. 50 ff., and De Imitatione, pp. 20 ff. 

9 Cf. De Compositione Verborum, chs. 4 and 10. 

10 C. 508. 10. 1. 13. lf 9. 4. 18. 

6 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

clausulae et debita actionibus resperatio et cludendi inchoandique 
sententias ratio. In Herodoto vero cum omnia, ut ego quidem 
sentio, leniter fluunt, lum ipsa S{,d\e/cTo$ habet earn jucunditatem, 
ut latentes etiam numeros complexa videatur : a better judgment 
than Cicero's. Dio Chrysostom says of Herodotos just what we 
should expect. It may be as well to quote here what he says of 
some other historians whom we shall have occasion to consider : 1 
fjiev ovv, et TTOTC ev$pocrvvr)s croi, 8et, pera 7roXX?}9 
evrevj-ei. To yap dveifievov /cal TO y\vKv 

Trapegec, fivOwSe? /jbd\\ov 77 lo-ropucov TO 
elvai. Twv Be a/cpcov ovKvSi8r)s e/Aol Sorcec /cal TWV Sevrepcov 
eoTro/ATro?. Kal yap prjTopiKOV TI Trepl rrjv d7rayy\iav TWV 
\oya)v %!,' Kal OVK dSvvaTo? ov$e oXt<yo9 Trepl TTJV epiAfjveiav, 
/cat, TO paOv/jiov Trepl Ta$ Xefet? ou% OVTCO fyavkov, wo-re o-e 
\VTT7Jo-ai,. "E^>opo9 Se TroXXrjv fjuev Icrropiav 
VTTTIOV /cal dvei/jievov Trjs dTrayye\(,a<; crou OVK e 

Lucian, whom we are to study more closely, says : 2 ' HpoSorot; 
eWe fjuev Kal TO, a\\a iMfLrjo-aadat, SvvaTov fjv ov irdvTa (frrjfjil 
o<ra Trpoa-rfv avTut fiel^ov yap ev^rj<^ TOVTO ye aXXa KCLV ev eic 
TO>V aTrdvTcov, olov fj /caXXo? T&V \6ytov rj dpjjLOviav avT&v TJ TO 
oiKelov Ty 'Icovia Kal TO TT/oocr^ue? rj T^9 yvcopr)? TO TrepiTTov $ 
oara jjuvpia Ka\d exelvos apa TrdvTa crvXkafiwv %et, Trepa rrj? et? 
fjLif^rjatv eXTT/So?' a 8e eTrolrjaev eirl rot? o-vyypdfjLfjuacrt Kal a>? 
TToXXoO af ^09 TO?9 f/ EXX77(Ti/ aTcaaiv ev ftpa^el /carecrrT;, Kal eya> Kal 
(TV Kal aXXo9 av ^L^o-aLfieOa. He speaks 3 further of the great 
reputation of Herodotos. 4 

The Greek Rhetoricians say much more than can be quoted 
here. Note first a general remark : 5 povos *HpoSoro9 ' 


Again, a general remark upon description : 7 

TrepiijyrjfjLaTiKcx; evapy&s VTT otyw aywv TO 
Kal Trap 1 'H/aoSorw TO eI8o9 Trjs t/3i8o? Kal TO>V LTTTTCOV TCOV 

Kal TWV KpOKoSei\0)V TWV 

1 Or. 18. 10. 2 Herodotus I (1. 831-832). 3 Ib., 2. 

* Cf. Hist. 42 (2. 55) ; 54 (2. 64) ; Ver. Hist. 2. 31 (2. 127) ; Philops. 2 (3. 30) j 
*Salt. 78 (2. 310) ; *De Domo 20 (3. 201) ; [Macrob.] 10 (3. 214). 
b vep\ tyovs, Spengel 1. 262. 28. 

6 Cf. Demetrius, irepi epnyveias (irepl ffvvBfTuiv ovo/j.drwi'), Sp. 3. 287. 6. 
7 Theon., vpoyv/^vdo-futra (vepl tiuppdo-fws), Sp. 2. 118. 6. 

Herodotoa in the Greek Renascence. 7 

Then more particularly, beginning with Hermogenes : l rb <yap 
, /cal TO Kpoiao? r]V, /cal ra rotavra ovrco JJLCV 
/car opOorrjra Kal KaOapov iroiel rov \6yov ical 
<ra(f)r), el Se 7r\a<yidcrai<;, ov roiavra carat, olov Kpoicrov 6Wo? 
/cal KavSaiiXov 6Wo9, el Xeyot9. 2 

Again : 3 Xef 49 Se <y\VKia r\ re TT}? a<eXetct9 i$ia irapa rrjv 
KaOapav prjOelaa elvcu Kal en, r) iroi^TiKr]. Tavrrj 101 Kal 

'HpoSoTO? T?}? <y\VKVT7JTOS fJbd\L(TTa 7r(f>pOVTLKOD<i ^p^(7aTO JjLV 

Kal /Jb6068oi,<; Kal evvolais, alairep Kal ^yLtet? e^apaKT^pL^o^ev rr)V 
egei, re eKaa-rrj ISia fiev TT}? a^eXeta? TroXXa^oO, wcrTrep 
, eKeldev Se fjudXtara SiapKrj ecr%6 rrjv ry\VKVT7)Ta, on Kal 
avrrjv GV&VS rrjv StaXe/croz/ Tro^rt/cw? 7rpoeL\ero eiirelv. 

Again : 4 eV roivvv rofc icaff 1 laTOpiav irav^vpLKol^ TravTjyvpi- 
G<TTIV o 'HpoSoro?, TO S' airLov on fjuera rov Kadapov Kal 
vs TroXt;? eo-Tt Tat? fjftovals Kal <yap ral<$ evvoLa^ /juvOiKais 
<r'%6o'bv airdcraw Kal TTJ Xefe^ TroirjriKf Ke%pr)Tai $io\ov, KT\. 
Again : 5 an example of 7rape/ji/3o\tf : Kpoto-o? TJV A.V So? uev TO 
Se 'AXu drreco, rvpavvos Se eOvecov r&v eWo? f/ AXuo9 
09 pecDV diTO fjLeo-rjfjLppi'rjs /juera^v ^vpcov [TC] Kal 

Again : 6 rcov fjuevroi, KCO\COV Kal KopfjuaTayv TOIOVTCOV crvvn- 
?rpo9 aXX^Xa crvvicrTavTai al TrepioSoi ovofjLa^o^evaL. 
yap 7T6ptoSo9 a'vari^^a GK KcaiXcov rj Ko^fidrcov evKaraarpo- 
7T/309 Trjv Sidvoiav rrjv v7roKi/j,ewr)v dTrrjpTta-fjLevov . . . 77 Se 
p^veua Ka\elrai, rj et9 Ko>\a \e\VfjLewr) ov poka 
o-vvrjpTrjfjieva, 009 77 ^Karaiov, Kal ra irXeicrTa r&v 
, Kal 0X0)9 77 dp^aia iracra. 7 

1 Trepl t'SecSi/ (Trepl Kadapdryros % Kadapwv tvvoiwv), Sp. 2. 278. 4. [These refer- 
ences are in the order of occurrence in Spengel.] 

2 Cf. Ib., 2. 278. 17. 8 Ib. (rrcpl y\v K 6rnros), 2. 362. 8. 
4 Ib., 2.421.5. 

6 Alexander, irepl ffx-n^drav (irepl irope^jSoX^s), 3. 39. 20. The example is from 
Hdt. 1. 6. 

6 Demetrius, irepl 'Epfjnrivetas (irepl irfpi68uv), 3. 262. 17. 

7 Cf. ib., 3. 264. 20; 3. 272. 15; Hermog., 2. 238 ff.; Aristotle, A.K. 3. 9ff. 

8 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 


From the reaction in favour of the old masters, the beginning of 
which was described in the first chapter, the period of the Renas- 
cence may be said to date, roughly stated, from the middle of the 
first century to the middle of the third. All the writers of any 
importance within these limits made more or less use of the old 
classics : some took one author for a model ; some imitated slavishly 
one or more as they used one style or another, as they wrote upon 
one subject or another ; some thoroughly assimilated all, and so 
used them more effectively. It is not for Herodotos alone that 
we claim influence in the Renascence, but we would emphasize his 
influence, because it has not been sufficiently recognized publicly, 
and point out something of the nature of that influence. 

While Lucian has been selected as the author for most careful 
study, other great writers of the Renascence demand notice, Dio 
Chrysostom, Arrian, Aelian, Philostratos. Much of what I shall 
say of three of these writers is taken from Schmid in his Atticism us, 
and Grundmann's l study of Arrian has been helpful. 

Dio Chrysostom is generally admitted to be the first writer of the 
Renascence, and so may be noted first briefly. " Dio is not exempt 
from the unreality of his age, but the thought is deeper, the moral 
conviction more thorough, than we find in the mere ' sophist' or 
' rhetorician ' of the Greek Renaissance, and his orations or, better, 
' essays ' are something more than rhetorical exercises. His style 
is clear and fluent, he is a good story-teller, 2 and his Atticism, though 
not the success it was once held to be, is more than respectable." 3 
Philostratos 4 says of him, that he has taken the best from the best. 
He is decidedly in opposition to the Asianic style in choice of sub- 
ject, in aversion to excitement and pathos, in careful cultivation of 
classic models. As a statesman he naturally attached much 
importance to the old historians, to Herodotos in particular. Dio's 

1 Quid in elocutione Arriani Herodoto debeatur, Berlin, 1884. 

* The italics are mine. 3 Gildersleeve in Johnson's Cyclopaedia. 

*V.S. 2.6. 30(Teubner). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 9 

own estimate of Herodotos has been quoted in Chapter II. 1 
Cobet 2 says: nullum alium scriptorem Dio diligentius lectitavit 
quam Herodotum, cujus ubique apud eum sunt vestigia. Schmid 3 
says that Dio allows some lonisms. He also says 4 that when Dio 
narrates, as at the beginning of Or. 7, he has a plain, simple sen- 
tence-position with many coordinate clauses joined by particles ; 
but when he is sententious or philosophic, he has a more periodic 
style. In this connection Schmid calls Plato a master in the use 
of particles, and so he is ; but all recognize that the use of particles 
in these late writers is not wholly dependent upon Plato. It will 
be one of my main points that the use of coordinate clauses joined 
by coordinate particles, especially in narrative passages, is due to 
the influence of the one master in such prose composition, Herodo- 
tos. This influence is claimed for Dio, though not to the same 
extent as in some others. Being earlier than Lucian and a man of 
less ability, in a sense, Dio is naturally more mechanical in his imi- 
tation of Herodotos and sometimes copies almost literally. Some 
words that Schmid gives from the use of Herodotos are : 6 
arpeuL&iv, 1. 17. 29, Teubner Text (or. 1. 70); e/cfipd 
1. 120. 31 (7. 239); ri/cco used as Hdt. 1. 30: TeXXw TOVTO 
Tt)? 7ToXtO9 ev f] KOVO-VIS TralSes rjcrav /ca\oi re /casyaOot,; Xevarrfp, 
1. 46. 20 (3. 113), from an oracle of Hdt. 5. 67 ; pvo^ai, 1. 51. 13 
(3. 124); o-uo-Tpo^, 1. 11. 31 (1. 61); vTrepKvjrelaOai,, 1. 322. 9 
(29. 53). Dio uses by the side of the regular forms of olSa such 
forms as olSas, 1. 22. 7 ; oftapev, 1. 43. 23 (3. 109), cf. Hdt. 2. 17, 
4. 16 ; oUare, 1. 371. 10 (31. 608) ; ol'Sao-t, 1. 305. 5 (23. 511), cf. 
Hdt. 2. 43. Here, as elsewhere, enters in the question of the 
KOWIJ, for these forms are found in the New Testament. From 
we find re'rei^e, etc., 1. 346. 31 (31. 569), by the side of 
, cf. Hdt. 3. 40. 8 The favorite substantivized neuter 
adjective begins with Herodotos. 7 As to subject-matter, Dio has 
frequently drawn from Herodotos, examples of which will be given 
in connection with Lucian. But we may quote here the story of 

1 V. Or. 18. 10. Mnem., N. S., 5. 98. Att. 3. 13. 

* Att. 1. 178. Att. 1. 145. 6 Cf. Schmid, Att. 1. 84 ff. 

7 V. Stein to Hdt. 1. 58, 86, 97, etc. 


Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Croesus and Alcmaeon as given by the two. 1 Note the language, 
the particles, the conjunctions, the participles. 


ev&vs Ki6&va fjueyav /cal KO\- 

7TOV 7TO\\OV KaTa\l,7r6/JLVO<} 

evpio-K evpVT 
VTToSrjcrdfjLevos, tfle 69 
Orjaavpov 69 TOV ol 

O-7T(70DV B 69 

jjiev Trapecra^e irapa ra<$ 
rov 'xpvaov ocrov e^cape- 
ov ol /codopvoi' fiera Se TOV 
TrdvTO, 7r\vjo-d/jLevo<; 
Kal 9 

/ce(f>a\f)<; SiaTrdcras TOV 
T09 teal d\\o Xa/3a>i> 9 TO 
(rTO/jba, %r)ie e/c TOV Oijaavpov 

\KCOV fJLV /JiOyiS TOt'9 /Co06pVOV<f, 

TravTi 8e Tew otVa)9 fiaXkov rj 
dv0pa>7rq>. TOV TO TC crTOfia e/3e- 

/cal TrdvTa e^ooy/ccoro. 

8e TOV Kpotaov 76X0)9 


ovSe ye TOV \a/36vTa Trapa 
"Kpoicrov rrjv Scopedv eicelvov 

' A.\KfjL(i)Va 

\wv ovre 

OVT 2)o- 

Set9 T&V TOTC 
a> (fraai, TOV 
TOVS Orjcrav- 
(f>epLV avTOV 

OTTOO-OV ftov\eTa(, TOV ^pvcrov. 

/cal TOV elo-e\66vra Trdvv dv&pei- 



/ca TOV 

/cal Ta9 

yvdOov? e/caTepa<; /JLO\I<; ego) 
, axTTrep av\ovvTa TTJV 
iva, yeXwra /cal 
6eav KpotVft) Trape^ovTa /cal 

Schmid 2 gives Plato and Xenophon first place as regards evi- 
dent influence over Dio in /c\oyr) ovofjuaTcov, but compare Dio 
1. 260. 11 with Hdt. 1. 7, especially Dio 1. 277. 6 with Hdt. 1. 66, 
where the matter corresponds and an entire line of an oracle given 
by Herodotos is quoted by Dio, Dio 1. 275. 6 ff., with Hdt. 1. 159, 
Dio 1. 419. 15, with Hdt. 1. 202, Dio 2. 47. 16, with Hdt. 3. 102, 
Dio 2. 213. 13, with Hdt. 1. 84. 

Arrian. Schmid does not consider Arrian in his study of the 
Renascence, possibly because Arrian has been generally recognized 
as an imitator of Xenophon ; possibly because the work had been 

1 Hdt. 6. 125; Dio 2. 280. 32 (78. 425). 

2 Att. 1. 147. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 11 

done by Grundmann. Many scholars who wrote about Arrian 
and Xenophon also claimed incidentally for Thucydides, and 
especially for Herodotos, an influence over Arrian. 1 But Grund- 
mann goes further and claims more dependence upon Herodotos 
than upon Xenophon. 2 Omitting for the present Grundmann's 
remark about the dialect, we note : Saepius eum in rebus geo- 
graphicis laudat, ut Herodotum ab eo diligentissime pervestigatum 
esse cognoscamus. In elocutione autem Arrianum secutum esse 
Herodotum. This latter statement he discusses in three chapters : 

De verborum ubertate ac quodam genere pleonasmi, quod ei 
cum Herodoto commune est ; 

Deinde de ratione enuntiatorum conjungendorum, quae multis 
locis propius accedit ad Herodoti genus dicendi, quod Xeftv 
elpo/jLewrjv dicimus ; quocum cohaeret quaedam elocutionis negle- 
gentia utriusque propria ; 

Denique de ionismis, qui extant apud Arrianum in usu pro- 
nominum,praepositionum, particularum ; ad quod adiciam nonnul- 
las structuras, locutiones, vocabula, quae apud utrumque singularia 

In the first chapter numerous examples are given of different 
kinds of pleonasm: (1) the force of an adjective increased by an 
added substantive, as pe^Oel fjueyas, Hdt. 1. 51, Arr. 5. 19. 5, 
etc.; (2) the notion of the compound verb expressed more accu- 
rately by the addition of the adverb used in composition, as 
6K$>epeiv egco, Hdt. 3. 16.; (3) a preposition or verb more fully 
explained by an adverb signifying the same thing, as Hdt. 4. 201. 
606oi> 6(70) 69 TO Te%o9, 4. 168. dp^dfjievoi TTp&Toi ; (4) the same 
word repeated two or three times recalling the same person or 
thing, as Arr. 4. 22. 2 KOI /nd^rj^ y6vo/j,6vr)s Trpbs avrovs Kparepas 
VIK&GW ol djjifyl Kpdrepov rf) /Jid^y, also the repetition of proper 
names, as Arr. 1. 29. 1 teal dfyucvelrat, e? KeXatz/a? TreyLtTrrato?* 
eV 8e rat? KeXatrat? aicpa TJV, also a verb and a participle, as 
Hdt. 5. 95. 'AXtfa?O9 o 770^x^9 CLVTOS JJLGV (frevycov e/c^evyctf 
(5) add the repetition of certain particles pleonastically, as Se, //,/, 
KaL'j (6) in seeking to make their writing easily understood, both 

1 Cf. Jahres. 34. 180 ff. for reviews of a number of these. V. Grundmann also. 
*V. reviews in Jahres. 38. 275 and Phil. Anz. 15. 223. 

12 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Herodotos and Arrian are not afraid to use enough words in their 
sentence-building to emphasize different clauses and separate clearly 
protasis from apodosis : many particles are suitable for this pur- 
pose : OVTCO or ovra) 77 is common after a clause, after a genitive 
absolute, as Hdt. 8. 23. diray<yei\dvTwv Be TOVTCOV ra r)V ovrw 877 
a/jLO, 77X10) o-fciBvajjievq) irdora rj crrparLrj eTrXwe, after a conjunctive 
participle, after a parenthetic clause with yap, after an accusative abso- 
lute, etc. : evravOa is used in the same way, and rore in the apodosis, 

TOTe 77, TO VTV06V, 7T/005 TaVTCL, 7T/909 TaVTCL Br) O)Z>, TOljaptoV *. 

especially noteworthy here is the use of Be in the apodosis after 
personal pronouns, as Hdt. 3. 37. 69 Be TOVTOV? //,T) oTrcoire, eye* 
Be o-rjfjiaLva), after the article used as a demonstrative; (7) the 
repetition of several words, or epanalepsis, to make the language 
plainer and more easily understood, as Hdt. 4. 76. &>? dirlicero 
(sc. *Az>a^ap<7t<?) 5 rr)v ^KvOiicrjv, /caraBvs e? rrjv /ca\eo/jLevr)v 
'TXatT/z/ (77 $ecrTi irKerf), e? ravrrjv 877 tcaraSvs 6 'Az>a^ap<rt9 rrjv 
oprrjv eVereXee : there are various kinds of this epanalepsis too 
numerous to mention here; (8) the use of short clauses to conclude 
a narrative before beginning something else, introduced especially 
by OVTCO 77, as Hdt. 4. 153. ovrw Srj o-reXXoim Svo Trevrijtcov- 
repov? ? T77i; HXareav, also by c58e; (9) note finally the use of 
the third person of the imperative, as Hdt. 1. 92. ical irepl pev 
dvaOTj/jLarow roa-avra elpija-Oo). Similar examples are cited in 
great numbers by Grundmann and can be seen on almost every 
page of both Herodotos and Arrian. 

The second chapter is but a continuation of the first : here again 
is evidence of an abundance of words, an abundance acquired in 
the same way, by the use of particles, many of them the same. 
Xeft? eipofjuevrj is coordination where particles abound, such as 
Se, fcai, re, re ... /cai, yap, aXXa yap, ovv(wv), where one clause 
seems to be joined to another as if added by chance. Details 
and examples may be omitted here, as this construction will be 
carefully studied in the chapters on Lucian. Suffice it to say, that 
Arrian is very close to Herodotos at this point. 

These two agree also in their use of anacoluthon, as Hdt. 5. 
37., where the fjuev clause has a participle and the corresponding 
Be clause a finite verb : pera Be KOI ev rfj a\\r) 'Icwiy TWVTO 
TOVTO eiroiee, rou9 fjuev J*e\avv(i)v T&V rvpdvvcov, TOU? Be e'Xa/Se 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 13 

rvpdvvovs. The particle 77 is used in the same way, also 
ov a\\d. Again, eadem ratio est, si ad appositionem adicitur 
enuntiatum, as Hdt. 2. 134. f PoSw7rt9, yeverjv pev diro SpTjfarjs, 
Sov\ij Se rjv 'IaS//,oi/o9. Note in this connection the expression 
rd re d\\a nai used for the more common Attic aX\a>9 re ical, 
as Hdt. 1. 193. rovs crv/cecov rpoirov depairevovcrt, rd re a\\a 
KOI fyoiviKwv rov KapTrbv 7T6pi,$eov<Ti, rTJcTi, ^a\avr)<^opoi(j-i. 
Other forms of \\09 are used. Again, there is marked free- 
dom in shifting from Oratio Obliqua to Oratio Recta and vice 
versa : both Herodotos and Arrian furnish many interesting and 
varied examples. Finally, Grundmann gives a number of un- 
classified examples from both in which a sentence is left apparently 
unfinished, though it is really continued with a changed construc- 
tion, as Hdt. 8. 87. /cal rj ov/c e%oucra Siafoyelv, e/^TrpocrOe yap 
avrfa rjvav d\\cu vee? c^'Xtat, eSofe ol roSe Trorfcrat,. A note 
of warning is sounded here which must be heeded everywhere, 
that all these constructions are not confined to Herodotos among 
the old masters, for Thucydides and Plato especially have them, 
one of whom has preserved many other things from the diction 
of Herodotos, and the other on account of the dialogue form is 
nearer Herodotos in his language. However, a summary of the 
evidence plainly proves that Arrian imitates Herodotos in the 
above mentioned particulars. 

Inasmuch as the title of Grundmann's third chapter already 
cited is full and self-explanatory, and as Arrian's lonism is 
generally recognized as an imitation of Herodotos, and as the 
important constructions which might be mentioned here must be 
discussed later, comment at this point is unnecessary. We may 
quote from Dr. Allinson, 1 who studies Arrian's Historia Indica 
in connection with Lucian's De Dea Syria and De Astrologia : 
u Of the three pieces now under consideration the Historia Indica 
presents the fewest difficulties. As it is transmitted as genuine, 
the investigation is not complicated by the question of author- 
ship. Arrian's lonism also more closely resembles the usage of 
Herodotos. . . . Did he intend a thorough imitation of Herodotos? 

1 Pseudo-Ionism in the Second Century, A. D., American Journal of Philology, 

7. 203 ff. 

14 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

It may be assumed provisionally that he did." " The motif, 
then, however superficially carried out, was a desire to revive 
the style, selection of matter, and treatment of Herodotos, as 
well as his dialect." " But the imitation of matter is more 
successful than that of the manner." 

Aelian and Philostratos mark the beginning of a general 
break-down. They close the Renascence. In them more than 
in any others, except possibly Arrian, is evident the influence of 

Again reserving details for the more careful study of Lucian, 
we may give here some of Schmidts conclusions about Aelian. 
His style is the Xeft? elpopevrj, he abounds in intentional anaco- 
lutha as Arrian in his effort to copy Herodotos, like Herodotos 
and Arrian he makes use of parataxis which leads to a<eXeta, 
he shows dependence upon Herodotos especially by the frequent 
insertion of parentheses or supplementary additions of shorter 
syntactic independent explanations. In accordance with this 
statement we expect and find a large proportion of Herodotean 
particles, as d\\a yap, yap 8ij, yap ovv, ye Srj, Se in the conclu- 
sion after foregoing conditional, relative, and temporal clauses, 
/cai with such words as TTCLVV, paka, o-cfrobpa, /cdpra, etc., with or 
without the article, 1 KCLI between the preposition and its noun, etc. 
Attention will be called to the marked abundance of parenthetic 
words and expressions. 

The Ionic dialect gives pleasantness, d^eXeta, yXv/cvrr)?, as 
may easily be seen by stripping off the dialect from some of 
Herodotos as Dionysius has done. 2 We have learned from the 
passage in Quintilian already quoted that the dialect of Herodotos 
has such sweetness that it appears to contain within it some 
latent rhythmical power. In the Renascence this effect began to 
be striven after by Arrian and was continued by Aelian and 
Philostratos. After allowing due credit to the KOIVY] for such 
forms as yivo^ai, yivctxrfcco, etc., the general Ionic tendency as 
seen in Aelian may be rightly traced to the influence of Herodotos. 
Schmid gives as conscious lonisms in vocalization the use of (77) 

1 V. Stein to Hdt. 1.71. 

"Dion. Hal., De Admir. Vi Dicendi in Demosth. 41. 

Herodotos in the Greek 

for (a) in Opfjaaa, Trer^Xoz/, 'louTUT/r^, /cprjcrtyvyerov ; (ov) for (o) 
in 0^X09, /juovvd!;, OVVO/JLO, ; (et) for (e) in pzCKiyQrivai, /jLefatypa, 
fj,ei\i'%ios ; also forms of the personal pronouns of the third 
person in the function of the simple avro?, in the singular only 
ol for avT<p and in the plural o-<j)cbv, o-^iac, a<f>a<; reflexive and 

Three principal sources for words in Aelian and the Renascence 
generally are claimed : Comedy, Plato, Xenophon. Schmid says 
Aelian has taken from the poets 861 words, from Plato 78, from 
Xen. 71, from Herodotos 52, from Thuc. 27, from Dem. 11. This 
proportion will answer for the whole Renascence as far as lan- 
guage is concerned. A few words and expressions from Hdt. are : 
^d\\o^ai TI eV epavrov, 1 eOeXo/ca/ceco, 6fC7r\ec0 r&v fypevwv, 
TTO\VS used adjectivally instead of adverbially, also imitated by 
Arrian, free use of eiceivos referring to the following, and less 
frequently 6'8e to the foregoing. 

Finally, we see how powerfully Aelian was influenced by 
Herodotos in a similar effort to produce an impression of credi- 
bility, to give clear evidence of what he writes and the source of 
his representations, to discriminate between what he knows and 
what he thinks or hears. This he strives for by frequent refer- 
ences, by accentuation of verbal information, by frequent citations, 
by appeal to evident national traditions, by intimations of criticism 
of his sources. 2 Triirva^ai Se /cal TOVTOV rov \6yov, el 8e d\r)0rf<} 
ecTTiv OVK ol$a. o 8' ovv TreTrvcr/jLat, e/ceivo ea-riv. 

Philostratos. Nearly everything that has been said of Aelian 
may be said of Philostratos. There is Xeft? elpo^ievr] but with 
anacolutha of a different kind, long periods being rare ; the same 
abundance of parenthetic words and expressions. Ion isms, too, 
present the same difficulties, but Schmid gives as clearly Ionic 
Ls, the genitives 1/7709 and vywv, Top^/eLy 

etc., in addition to some of the same given for Aelian. 

He, too, has 52 words from Herodotos and uses other authors' 
language much in the same proportion as Aelian. As Herodotean 

1 V. Stein to Hdt. 3. 71. and 3. 155. 
'Cf.VH. 53. 21. 

16 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

expressions, note TO fj,ev <ra<e9 OVK ol8a; 1 SrjXaxrai, /SouXoyLtat j 2 
7&> Brj\a)a-(i) ; 3 etc. 

Special mention may be made of the use of the third attributive 
position, as eV TrarpiSa rrjv e/jujv ; 4 of the frequent use of the 
absolute nominative. Philostratos uses this construction much 
more frequently than Aelian. An example may be given from 
Arrian, who here again follows his master Herodotos : ol Se dfifa 
OVK ev r&> oyLtaXoS TraperdgavTO, aXXa .... opOLovs 
TOV9 Xo%ov9 nroXe//,6uo9 TTpoa-ijyev. 5 Note also 717)09 
with the genitive, which is especially common in Hdt. and his 
imitator, Arrian. 6 



Lucian's motto is : 7 Svow Se ovrow, arr av Trapa rwv 
Tf9 KTij<rcuTO, \ejeiv re $>vvacrQai teal Trpdrreiv ra Seovra 
ra)v dpia-rcov teal (f>vyf r>v ^eipovoiv. 

As the Renascence was a revival, a reconstruction, the literature 
of the period must have been more or less an imitation, but it was 
entirely possible for a gifted man so thoroughly to master the 
ancient classics, so minutely and sympathetically to acquaint 
himself with them, and so completely to assimilate them, that 
he could at the same time be following them and not be guilty 
of slavish imitation. This happy faculty combined with refreshing 
originality belongs to Lucian and makes it difficult to find definite 
trace of Herodotos or any one else in him. 

More work has been done along the line of Lucian's depend- 
ence upon the comic poets than elsewhere. There is more or 
less mention of this dependence by all Lucianic scholars, and a 
number of special works on it. Rabasti 8 claims that Lucian is 

!E. 229. 13. * V. S. 28. 29. 8 Ap. 77. 24. 

4 Phil., Ap. 34. 12, V. Schmid, Att. 4. 67, and for the construction in Hdt., 
Gildersleeve's Justin Martyr, 1 C. 6. 7. 
6 4. 5. 1. cf. Hdt. 8. 83. V. Schmid, Att. 4. 113. 
V. Schmid, Att. 4. 465. T Adv. Indoct. 17 (3. 114). 

8 Quid Comicis Debuerit Lucianus, 1865. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 17 

under much obligation to the comic writers not only in material, 
but also in form and in the manner of speaking. He has a 
chapter entitled, Quomodo in rerum dispositione comicos secutus 
fuerit Lucianus ; and another, Quid in genere dicendi simile 
comicos habuerit Lucianus. 1 Kock, 2 too, has treated this subject 
and by his own correct method of recovering lost verses of poetry 
from several parallel quotations, has restored a number of frag- 
ments of comic poets, some to the extent of 40 lines. " In Lucian's 
Timon the expressions are largely drawn from a comedy of the 
character of Aristophanes' Plutus." So also others. Not only 
comic poets are to be considered here, for there is also marked 
influence by the tragedians and especially by Homer. This indi- 
cates one of the many complications surrounding the study of 
Lucian's dependence upon Herodotos, for Herodotos himself must 
be connected with the poets. 3 

As is natural, signs of Plato are abundant in the dialogue, as : 
r) & 09. 4 There are many Platonic short expressions and questions, 
especially in Charon, as : TL Sal rovro rjv and TTW? yap ov ; 5 add 
v(j)rjfjLi, avdpcojre. 6 And even here we cannot get rid of the 
popular speech. 

Schmid has given us a study of Lucian's atticisms. But of his 
dependence upon individual authors, nothing has been said except 
in a general way. Lucian's fondness for Plato offers abundant 
results. In fact, here is another serious complication, for Plata 
was strongly influenced by both tragedy and comedy, and abounds 
in particles of all kinds. 7 His works are something of a universal 
storehouse and often exert an influence that might be attributed 
to Herodotos. 

1 Cf. Zeigler, De Luciano Poetaruin Judice et Imitatore, 1 872 ; also Schulze, 
Quae Eatio Intercedat inter Lucianum et Comicos Graecorum Poetas, 1883. 

* Rhein. Mus. XLIII, pp. 29-59, a continuation of his article in Hermes xxi 
(1886), p. 372 ff.: for the review of these, v. Amer. Jour. Phil., 10, p. 366. 

3 Cf. Forstemann, De Vocabulis Quae Videntur Esse apud Herodotum Poeticis, 

4 Kiihner and Bernhardy, Wiss. Synt., p. 306 ff. 

6 Cf. Luc., Charon, 6 (1. 497), 12 (1. 505): this whole section is decidedly 
Platonic in character. 
Cf. Plat. Protag. 330 D. 
7 Bernhardy, Wiss. Synt., p. 486. 


18 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

There has been no effort to establish the influence of Herodotos 
upon Lucian, though many scholars have believed in it and have 
given hints of their belief. Croiset l says : Herodote me parait 
etre celui dont il a lu les oeuvres le plus assidument. On voit, 
par divers passages de ses Merits, qu'il a vivement senti et admire 
ses grandes qualites litteraires, la beautS de son style a la fois si 
varie et si uui, cette grace ionienne qui lui est propre, la sagesse 
et le tour heureux de ses reflexions. Le souvenir trs-vif qu'il 
a garde de certaines scenes ou de certains e'venements racoutes 
par le grand historien atteste qu'il u'e"tait pas moins sensible a 
la forme dramatique de ses recits et a la grandeur simple de 
son imagination. In a note he says : Je signale surtout le 
premier paragraphe de 1'Herodote, ou Lucien se prononce d'une 
rnaniere de*cide"e sur 1'impossibilite d'imiter ces qualites si 
originales et si diverses dont la reunion constitue un genre de 
perfection que chacun sent, mais qu'il est difficile d'analyser. 
L'influence du style d' Herodote sur celui de Lucien ne me parait 
pas non plus douteuse. In a second note : On peut voir notam- 
ment dans le Charon (9-13) limitation abregee de 1'entrevue 
de Cresus et de Solon, et, dans la suite du meme dialogue, les 
allusions aux recits relatifs a Cyrus et a Tomyris, a Cambyse, a 
Polycrate. Such remarks furnish confidence for this study. 

The statement that Herodotos' style is the perfection of Xe^9 
elpoftevr} demands explanation, if we would understand his style 
and its influence. What is Xe'f 15 elpofjuevrj ? To what extent does 
Hdt. excel in this style and in other styles? Does Lucian use 
the same style to any extent? If so, does he use it through the 
influence of Hdt.? 

Aristotle, in the passage cited in Chapter II, continues : \eya) 
B eipo/MevTjv r) ov&ev e%ei, reXo? xaO* avrrjv, av /JLT) TO 7Tpay/j,a 
\yo/jivov reX.eitoOf). ecrrt, Be dr)8r)<; Sia TO aTretpov, TO yap reXo9 
7Ta^T? ftovKovTCii Kcudopav. The rhetoricians could not improve 
on this. Compare with this Kruger's 2 definition of parataxis : a 
combination where clauses stand together without interdependence, 
either syndetically by means of conjunctions or asyndetically by 
mere juxta-position. Miiller 3 strikes the true note in describing 

1 Vie et Oeuvres de Lucien, 1882, p. 94. Sprach. 59. 

8 Geschichte der Griechischen Litteratur, Donaldson's Translation, I, p. 362. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 19 

the style of Herodotos : " The character of his style (as is natural 
in mere narration) is to connect the different sentences loosely 
together, with many phrases for the purpose of introducing, 
recapitulating or repeating a subject. These phrases are char- 
acteristic of oral discourse. ... In this, as in other respects, the 
language of Hdt. closely approximates oral narrative; of all 
varieties of prose, it is furthest removed from a written style/' 
The different members are not related to one another as principal 
and subordinate, but as coordinates, sentences with Kai(re) /cat, 
fjuev Se, ^(Trorepov) rj, etc. Blass 1 says that pure Xef is elpofjuevrj 
was never actually in existence, that Hdt. was on the border 
line between the accumulation process and the process of closer 
connection as seen in Attic prose. Herodotos, then, is the best 
prose representative of Xeft? elpo/juevrj, which means that his 
narrative is marked by the purest simplicity, by the most 
natural manner of speaking, by coordination effected by coordi- 
nate particles, if you please, by syndetic parataxis, that his style 
has a charm and sweetness rarely found elsewhere, and not that 
his writings are deficient in the purest art. 

There are very few statements of scholars to justify a connection 
between Lucian and Herodotos in the use of parataxis. Lucian 
uses it, of course, as does every other Greek writer, more or less. 
Schmid 2 says that the inclination to parataxis (a mark of d<f>e\i,a) 
is especially strong in Lucian's Asinus. Schmid also quotes from 
Toxaris : 3 epol So/eel r/oefc e/celvot, rjcrav. Both of these pieces are 
spurious, but they fall within the Renascence and can be counted 
here, and Toxaris was proved spurious only by being proved too 
close an imitation of Lucian. 4 However, this study is confined 
to those confessedly Lucian's, the number of which is much 
curtailed if we accept only those allowed by Bekker, Dindorf, 
Sommerbrodt and more recent editors. The Ionic piece, De Dea 
Syria, furnishes better examples of Herodotean characteristics 
than any other, but that deserves a separate treatment. Whoever 
be its author, no one can deny that it is an intentional imitation 
of Herodotos. Such a claim is not set up for Lucian in general. 

lAlt. Bered. I, pp. 133 ff. Att. 1. 422. 62 (2. 556). 

4 Guttentag, De Subdito Qui inter Lucianeos Legi Solet Dealogo Toxaride. 

20 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Though there was a conscious effort to follow the best writers, 
there was no effort to adopt any writer's style, diction, or syntax. 
However, in the effort to assimilate all the earlier classics and 
his immediate predecessors and contemporaries, the -elements of 
his composition must at times appear undigested, the company 
he kept must tell. In speaking of his " use or misuse of the 
negative," Prof. Gildersleeve l says : " Now, Lucian was a careful 
student of attic Greek, ... so that it could hardly have been 
absolute heedlessness of the earlier usage; and, indeed, we find 
him every now and then reverting to the classic norm. The 
explanation is to be sought in the popular speech of the time. 
Lucian, man of the world as he was, avoided all affectation and 
followed the drift of the spoken language so far as it was not 
rude or solecistic." This explanation must be considered in all 
departments of the study. 

We naturally look for the influence of Herodotos in narrative 
pieces, so we should expect better result from Philopseudes, True 
Histories, etc., though we are by no means confined to these. 
The beginning of a narrative passage in Charon, for example, 2 
furnishes a good example of coordination by the use of icai : opG> 
yrjv 7ro\\r)V Kal \iuwrjv viva ueydXyv Trepippeovcrav Kal oprj 
Kal Trora/jLOvs rov KCOKVTOV Kal TLvpi^XeyeOovTos uei^ovas KOI 
dvOpcDirovs Trdvv <TuiKpov<? icai Tivas (f)(i)\6ov<; avrwv. Similar 
sentences and sentences coordinated in other ways, as by jjuev and 
Be, abound in Lucian's narrative pieces. 3 fjpepas aev ovv ovBev 
avrodev tca0eo)p)/jLv, VVKTOS Be eTriyevofjLevrjs e^aivovro fjfuv Kal 
a\\ai TroXXal vfjo-oi Tr\7icriov, at uev /zetfou?, al Be 
Trvpl TTJV 'Xpoav TTpoo-eoiKviai,, Kal a\\7) Be n<; 777 icdrco Kal 
ev avTJj Kal Trorauovs e^ovaa Kal 7re\dyrj Kal v\as Kal oprj. 
These conjunctions are supplemented by other particles and by 
participles : TroXXov? Be avrcov Kal eyvwpi&aaev ird\ai Trap' r]fuv 
, ol Brj Kal 'jrpoarjeaav Kal rjaird^ovTo a)? av Kal <rvvr)de(,<; 
, Kal r rrapa\af36vTe<$ rj/jbas teal KaraKOLfjiicravre^ Trdvv 
l Bel; &>? etfevi^ov, TT]V re 

1 A. J. P. 1, p. 47. * 6 (1.497). 

8 Ver. Hist. 1.10 (2. 78); cf. Ver. Hist. 1. 8(2. 76) ; 1.25(2.90); 1.25(2.91); 
1. 31 (2. 95) ; 1. 34 (2. 97) ; 2. 30 (2. 127) ; 2. 33 (2. 129) ; Char. 16 (1. 512) ; 
Philops. 7 (3.36); 22(3.50). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 21 

icaraa-icevdaravres ical virKT^vovfjievoL /3<z<rtXea<? re iroirja-eiv KOI 
varpaTras. 1 The presence of re ical in this sentence is another 
suggestion of Hdt. re is, of course, frequently used by others, 
but Grundmann 2 says that it is peculiar to Hdt. and his imita- 
tors to add a new thought or to elaborate an old one by means 
of re : ravra Be <J<$>L Troitjcrao'i, ical ofyOelcri VTTO TT}? Trawrjyvpios 
re\evrrj rov jSiov apiary eTreyevero o^eSefe re ev TQVTOKTI o #eo?. 3 
Compare the following from Lucian : TO 8' CLTTO rovrov /j,ijiceri, 
<f>epcov eya) rrjv ev r&> /ctfrei, Sicurav d^Oofievos re rfj 
riva etyrovv. . . . eiravafiavres Se eirl ra va>ra KOI 
TO) TIo(Ti,$c0vi avrov Trapa TO rpoiraiov r^fjuepa^ re T/^et 
crd^evoL vrjvefjbia yap fjv TT? rerdprrj aTreTrXevcra/jiev.* Note also 
in the last passage the participles and the parenthetic yap (v. below). 
Add another sentence from Lucian : evOa Srj ical /cadecopw/jiev 
\t,fievas re TroXXou? Trepl iracrav aic\vcrrov<s ical fieydXovs rcora^ov^ 
re SiavyeLS efyovras r^pe^a e? rr)V Od\arrav, en Se Xe^yLtwz^a? ical 
v\as real opvea fiova-iKa, ra fiev eTrl rwv rjlovwv aSovra, 7ro\\a 
Be ical eTrl r&v /cXdScov drjp re fcov(j)o<; /cal evTrvovs Trepte/ce^vro 
rrjv xcopav. 5 Again, Grundmann 6 calls attention to the frequency 
of afjua in this connection in Hdt., and to the use by Hdt. and 
Arrian of rd re a\\a icai for the more usual aXXw? re icai, though 
the latter is not wanting. Sommerbrodt, commenting on apa re 
ovv eTrirrjSeia e'So/cet rjfiepa re^vr)? evdp^ecrOai, tcdyo) TrapeSeSofjirjv 
. . . , 7 calls attention to the parataxis and its frequency with aaa. 
As examples of Lucian's use of rd re aXXa ical note the follow- 
ing : . . . Sirjyov/jieOa e\6ovre<$ rd re aXXa icai r&v eraipwv rrjv 
dfjL7re\ofjn,^Lav ; s and . . . rd re aXXa errvvOavo^Tjv teal o6ev CITJ. 
Compare a passage already cited : rrfv re d\\rjv uTroBo^rfv ^eya\o- 
TrpeTrfj Karaaicevdcravres ical viriayyov^voi ftacn\ea<; re Troitfo-eiv 
/cal aarpaTra?. Finally, Herodotos uses Se in the conclusion 
almost constantly. 9 It was a rare licence with other old writers, 
but Lucian, like Herodotos, has made the licence the rule. He 

1 Of. Ver. Hist. 2. 34 (2. 130). 3 P. 36. 3 Hdt. 1. 31. 

4 Ver. Hist. 2. 1 (2. 104), 2. 2 (2. 106). 5 Ver. Hist. 2. 5 (2. 108). 

6 Pp. 38, 47. 7 Luc. Somin. 3 (1. 5) ; cf. Timon 20 (1. 130). 

8 Ver. Hist. 1. 9 (1. 77) ; 2. 20 (1. 117) ; cf. Mofiinann, De Particularum Non- 
millarum apud Herodotum Usu, p. 32. 
9 Cf. Sagawe, Se im Nachsatz bei Herodotos, 1893. 

22 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

uses it after participles, CODJ unctions, relative pronouns, etc. 
eTreiSav rdyivra vvj; yevrfrai, 6 Se fcara/3d$ . . . Trepieio-iv ev /cvfc\q> 
rr)v oliciav. . . . And ocroi be Kara rov &ai$a\ov e^prjaaro 

Kalinka 2 says that Hdt. is especially partial to yap, frequently 
using it where we should expect a relative clause. Its frequency* 
he claims, is due to parataxis. Grundmann, too, p. 42, emphasizes 
the paratactic association of yap. Its frequency is not, of course, 
confined to Hdt. among the ancient classics. Plato is very fond 
of it, but his numbers would be very much diminished if we left out 
of the count all such expressions as 97 yap, TTW? yap ov. Hoffmann, 
p. 19, goes to the extent of denying that Herodotos' use of yap 
is any different from the common use. But no one who has read 
Hdt., or what the best scholars have to say of him, can deny that 
the Herodotean yap is decidedly paratactic, whether it merely 
affirms a certainty or assigns a cause. If the Herodotean freedom 
and ease is lacking in Lucian, we have abundant evidence of 
coordination by means of yap in preference to subordination, and 
there is a constant use of parenthetic yap, a special favorite with 
Hdt. ov8e rov Trap avrov <f>r)/ju,, rov &t,aSovfj,evov rrjv /ce<f)a\r)v 
rfj raivia, rov Ka\6v, TLo\VK\eLrov yap rovro epyov* etceiva) fj,ev 
ovv TO) /jueipaKLCi), ara<r6d\G) yap TJo-rrjv, &t,/cas ena-drr^v VOD be ov 
yap 7rl Kaiccp rwv Oewv ravra /3ov\evo/j,ev ri oir^l oiKobo/jLOvfjiev 
teal avrol Kara ra avra eTrucvkwSovvres 7rd\\r)\a ra oprj. . . . 4 
w f eve 'AOrjvale, elSes yap JJLOV rov rr\ovrov c . . . etVe /JLOI,, w 
Kpoicre, olet, yap n SelcrOai rwv rr\lvQwv rovrcov rov HvOtov ; 6 
rovrovs 670) ovtc tOeadd^v ov yap d^ifcovro. SioTrep ov$e ypdtyai 
ro-9 <f>v<ri,<; avr&v er6\/j,r)o-a' repdcrria yap /cal dmo-ra rrepl 
avrwv eyevovro. 7 All these are fair examples of Herodotean yap. 
Nor are they isolated examples. Lucian's narrative pieces are full 
of such. To give some idea of the frequency of yap, the True His- 
tories (44 pp.) have 100 examples, or 2.5 per Teubner page ; Philo- 

1 Philops. 19 (3. 47) and Imag. 21 (2. 480) ; cf. Philops. 15 (3. 43), De Domo 
15 (3. 198), Charid. 10 (3. 624), 17 (3. 628). 

8 Dissertationes Philologae Vindobonenses, 2. 145. 

8 Philops. 18 (3. 46) ; cf. ib. 12 (3. 40), 15 (3. 43). *Char. 3 (1. 494). 

Char. 10 (3. 502) (cf. Hdt. 1. 30). Ib. 12 (505). 

7 Ver. Hist. 1.13(2. 81). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 23 

pseudes (23 pp.) has 55, or 2.4 per Tetibner page. There is no 
discrimination in these figures, but I have noted no example of 
what might be called a Platonic yap. In Charon, where the 
average is even higher, 2.6, or 46 occurrences to 18 pp., one 
might cite a few instances of certain Platonic yap, naturally when 
we consider that it is largely dialogue. In all these we find 
many occurrences of ydp closely following one another, often 5 
or 6 to the page, which is in keeping with simple narrative in 
a paratactic style. And, what is more to the point, we find 
combinations of yap with all kinds of particles such as are 
peculiarly Herodotean, as /cal yap (9 times in Ver. Hist, part 1, 
of 22 pp.), fjuev yap, yap By, etc., whereas there is a noticeable 
absence of those combinations peculiarly Platonic (97 yap occurs 
once in Ver. Hist.). These points gather strength from the 
further point already made and emphasized by Kiihner, Kalinka 
and others about Herodotos' frequent use of yap in parenthetic 
sentences. This practice is very prevalent in Lucian and un- 
doubtedly comes from familiarity with Hdt., as can be seen by 
a glance at the examples and by the fact that the examples 
are most numerous in narrative pieces. evpia-KO) Be avroQi TOV 
fiev A.eovTi'Xpv ovK6Ti 6(f)6d/c6i, yap, o>9 e^acr/cev, o\Lyov Trpo- 
ei;e\7j\v0a)<; a\\ovs Be wyyovs. . . .* eTrel fj,rjBev d\r)0es 
i<TTopelv el%ov ovBev yap eireTrovOew a%io\oyov tVl TO TJrevBos 
erpaTrofjurjv. . . , 2 6 Be <&ae6wv, fyrjo-iv, o T&V ev T&> rj\Lq> /car- 
OIKOVVTWV /3ao-i\evs ol/celrai, yap &r) Kaiceivos coaTrep /cal r) 

X,a/3o^T? eVeXeXotVet yap ij&rj /cal Svo ravpovs dypiovs /cara- 
roj;vcrai>Ts aTreTrXeucra/ie^. 4 Add an analogous sentence without 
yap : eVet Se Kara TO Si/cao-rijpiov eyevoprjv Trapfjv Be /cal 6 
teal 6 Xdpcav /cal al M.otpai /cal al 'Eipwves o /JLCV Tt9 
/3a<7t\ev<? 6 nXoi^Tftj^ fjLOi Bo/cel /caOijo-ro e7n,\ey6/j,evos TWV 

ra ovo/jLara. 5 

AT} is another Herodotean particle used by him with great 
frequency, a claim which cannot be made for the earlier Attics, 

1 Philops. 6 (3. 34) ; cf. the same section ; ib. 14 (3. 41). 
a Ver. Hist. 1. 4 (2. 72). *Ib. 1. 12 (2. 79) ; cf. ib. 1. 36 (2. IOC). 

* Ver. Hist. 2.3 (2.106). 

5 Philops. 25 (3. 53). For confirmations of this usage for Lucian, v. Guttentag, 
p. 38, and Schwidop, Observat, Luc. I, 22 ff. 

24 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

according to Kalinka, though its use does become somewhat freer, 
as in Plato. Lucian makes free use of Srf and generally joins 
it with paratactic particles, /cat,, yap, etc., a practice peculiar to 
Hdt. and rare in most ancient Attics. Notwithstanding the fact 
that here, too, Schmid in his study of Dio and Lucian constantly 
refers to Xen. and Plato, I make bold to claim in narrative, at 
least, a larger influence of Hdt., and for three reasons. 1. Because 
it is more frequent in narrative pieces. We find in Tirnon (25 pp.) 
only three examples of 77, whereas in True Histories we find in 
the two parts of 22 pp. each, 12 and 24 examples respectively. 
2. Because it is nearly always used with particles. Of the 
examples noted in 25 pp. of Plato's Republic, less than one- 
third are combined with particles, but in Hdt. and in Lucian's 
True Histories more than three-fourths are in combination with 
particles. 3. Because it is much more frequent in Herodotean 
combinations than in Platonic. In Plato we note such combina- 
tions as 7ro)<? 77, vvv 77, which are not found in Lucian's narrative, 
nor in any of the pieces examined. But Lucian's fondness for /cat 77, 
fjiev 77, yap 77 is very marked, and all of these, Kalinka correctly 
says, are Herodotean. In the same 25 pp. of Plato, out of 45 occur- 
rences of Srj, there are two examples of ical 77 in the combina- 
tion /cal Srj Kaiy as against 9 examples in Lucian's True Histories. 
KOI &rj ical is used more frequently by other writers of the 
Renascence than by Lucian, but one passage, aXXo, re TroXXa 
repdaria 6pya6/jLvov, /cal 8rj /cal eVt /cpo/co8ei\cov o%ovfJLvov . . . l , 
must be compared with a passage in the first chapter of Hdt. and 
many other passages, aXXa? re 7roXXa9 /cal Sr) /cal rov 
Bvyarepa. Of. avvr)$pevov Se aXXot re TroXXol /cal ' 
Add to the combinations already mentioned evda Brj and evravOa Srj. 
An exhaustive treatment of subordinate sentences with their 
particles would be interesting, but a few general remarks on final 
particles will have to suffice in so short a study, dealing primarily 
with coordination. Herodotos 7 favorite final particle is Iva. " The 
following is the table of the number of occurrences in Hdt. : 
(1) Iva 107; (2) Stem? 12; (3) o*o>9 av 5; (4) <>? 16; (5) *>? av 
II." 8 iva with the subjunctive largely predominates, for after 

1 Philops. 34 (3. 60). Ver. Hist. 2. 10 (2. 110). 

3 Amer. Jour. Phil. 4, pp. 416 ff. and 6, pp. 53 ff. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 25 

historical tenses alone the subjunctive occurs 41 times and the 
optative only 23 times. It means nothing, of course, that Lucian, 
too, has 107 occurrences of Iva, for his corpus, genuine and 
spurious, is nearly twice that of Hdt., but it is not without 
significance that he shows a very decided preference for the 
subjunctive after iva. Heller 1 gives f iva with subj. 94 times, 
with opt. only 8 times, and a few times with indie. Special 
importance attaches to this when we compare the constructions 
of w a and 009. Hdt. uses o>9 sparingly. Lucian, on the other 
hand, uses it over 300 times. The first point is the predominance 
of o>9 with opt. Out of 318 occurrences it is found with the 
opt. 235 times, and is freely used after principal tenses. Why ? 
" The opt. is dying out, and when would-be elegant writers try 
to use it in final sentences they overdo it, as is notoriously the 
case in Lucian, who uses &>9 with opt. freely after principal tenses." 2 
Thus, he is not necessarily following Plato, who is partial to the 
opt., and is here in marked contrast with his own more natural 
use of iva. The second point is that of all these occurrences of 
ft>9, not one is found in True Histories, his model narrative of 
nearly 50 pp. Nor do we find O7ro>9 here; Iva occurs twice. 
Why did Lucian prefer the subj. with iva even after secondary 
tenses when he went to the other extreme in the use of the opt. 
with 0)9 even after primary tenses? Why omit his elegant o>9 
with opt. in his model stories ? In conclusion, it may be stated 
in general terms as to Lucian's narrative pieces that there is a 
marked preference for coordination and coordinate particles. 


Periodology is a very broad term. Although it is claimed, as 
we have seen, that Herodotos' style is the perfection of Xeft9 
eipo/jLevrj, and although it is a fact that Aristotle and Hermogenes 
do not touch upon periods, cola, etc., except in connection with 

1 Die Absichtssatze bei Lucian, fra, s, &rs. * A. J. P. 6, p. 68. 


26 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Karea-Tpapfievrj, still Hdt. is not wholly unperiodic and in 
any case the structure of his sentences, taking periodology in its 
wider signification, demands a word. Blass 1 represents Hdt. as 
one who accumulates, as one on the border line between the so-called 
joining-on manner of speaking of the poets and old prose writers 
and the close union which was first perfected in Attic prose. The 
study of any author's periodology should include an examination 
of (1) the kind of sentences, whether coordinate or subordinate, 
the various kinds of each and the conjunctions used; (2) the 
extent of the sentences, whether long or short, the number of 
clauses and their arrangement ; (3) the formation of sentences 
with regard to figures. Add as corollaries to be noticed (4) the 
fullness of his sentences, or de verborum ubertate, and (5) the 
general character of the narrative, whether opOorrjs is preferred 
or TrXayiacrfjLos. 

The first and most important point has been fully discussed 
in Chap. IV. On the next point, Miiller, continuing the passage 
cited above from Donaldson's translation, 2 says : " Long sentences, 
formed of several clauses, are for the most part confined to 
speeches." Schmid 3 says that in Lucian long sentences are the 
exception. It is impossible to count cola in Hdt. as, e. g., in 
Isocrates. In fact, as noted, the rhetoricians did not study periods 
and cola in Hdt., and no wonder when only such definitions 
were available as Aristotle's a<eX?) (jrepioSov) Be Xeya) rrjv 
fjLov6tca)\ov and KCO\OV S'eVrl TO erepov /juopiov ravrrj^, and 
Hermogenes' KCO\OV Be ecrnv aTrrjprio-fjLevr} Sidvoia. Naturalness, 
the adding on of a clause which seems to be an afterthought, 
the stringing along "rosary" fashion what Isocrates would care- 
fully subordinate, stating simply with unaffected eloquence what 
Isocrates would adorn with studied finery, is Herodotos' chief 
charm. Yet with all this natural simplicity and apparent lack 
of orderly consecution of colon upon colon, his sentences are 
not composed of clauses thrown together incoherently, though 
there may not be formed a rhetorical climax or an Isocratean 
period. These same conditions prevail in Lucian's narrative. 
We cannot count cola and clauses in his sentences. He has 

1 Att. Bered. 1. 136 ; cf. 1. 133 for a more detailed analysis. 
1, p. 362. Att. l,p. 422. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 27 

not the Isocratean periods. He has undeniably, however, the 
"rosary" effect, if not to the same extent as Hdt. There are 
whole passages and numberless sentences that remind us of Hdt., 
though, as is to be expected, much of the Herodotean charm is 
missing. A few sentences must suffice : TJV Be /cal l^vr) Bvo 
7r\Tjo-LOV fcVl TreTpas, TO jj,ev TrXeOpialov, TO Be eXarrov ejiol 
Bo/ceiv, TO fjbev TOV kiovvcrov TO jM/cpoTepov, OaTepov Be 'Rpa/cXeovs : l 
Tore Be TOV TTOTdfjibv Bia7repdo~avTe<?, y Bt,a/3aTO<; rjv, evpo/jiev 
d/jL7re\a)v Xpfj^a TepdcrTcov TO pev yap diro TT)? 7779, o crreXe^o? 
avTos evepvrjs teal 7ra%v$, TO Be dva) yvvai/ce? r)o~av, oaov etc 
TO>V \a<y6vGov djravTa e^ovcrai, Te\eia : 2 av ftev oftv 9 TO (frpeap 
KaTajSfj Tt9, dnovet TrdvT&v TWV irap'fjiMV ev Ty ryfj \eyo pevtov, 
lav 8e 69 TO KaTOTTTpov aTroftXetyr), irdaa^ [lev 7roXet9, irdvTa Se 
eOvrj opa &cnrep ecfrecrTcbs eicdcrTow TOT /cal TOU9 oiicelovs eyo) 
eOeacrdfjirjv /cal 7rao~av TTJV TraTpiSa, el Be icdicelvoi e/jie ecopcov, 
ov/c e%o> TO dcr<t>a\e<i elfrelv? The last sentence is very suggestive 
of Hdt. eTTifjuevovTos Be TOV irvev/^aTo-^ (frepeiv ov Bwdfievoi, 
TotovBe TL eTrevoTJaajjiev o Be TTJV fyvcofjiTjv dnrofyrivdiievos r)v 
^/civOapos a-KatyavTes yap ev TO) vBaTi o-Trrj\ai,ov fjueyto-TOV ev 
TOVTO) e/JLeivapev r^^epa^ TpidicovTa, irvp dvaicalovTes /cal viTQvpevoi 


Herodotos' skill in the use of particles is reinforced by an equally 
skilful manipulation of the participle. By means of these two he 
adds variety, freshness, and simplicity to his narrative and avoids 
the monotony of cola after cola with such Isocratean regularity : 
e. g. Trapd TOVTCOV 'Hpa/cXelBai eTriTpafyQevTes effftov Trjv dp^v e/c 
iov, /c Bov\r)$ Te T?}9 'lapBdvov ryeyovoTes real f Hpa/cXeo9, 
fiev eVl Bvo Te /cal eiicocrL ryeveds dvBpcov, Tea TrevTe Te 
/cal TrevTa/cocria, 7rat9 Trapd TraTpb? e/cBe/co/juevo^ TTJV dpxtfv, pexpt, 
KavBav\eco TOV Mvpaov. 5 " Herodotos, . . . while he seems to be 
on the whole polymetochic, shows a remarkable variation from the 
polymetochic, 1. 123, where Harpalus sends the hare to Cyrus, 
down to the oligometochic, 3. 41-3, the story of the ring of 
Polykrates." 6 " It is no accident that we find in the Vera Historia 

1 Ver. Hist. 1. 7 (2. 75). Ib. 1. 8 (2. 76). 

S 76. 1. 26 (2. 91) ; cf. 1. 31 (2. 95). 

4 Ib. 2. 2 (2. 106); cf. 2. 17 (2. 114); 2. 20 end (2. 118); 2. 41 (2. 134); and 
many others. 5 Hdt. 1. 7. 

Amer. Jour. Phil. 9. 150. 

28 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

of Lucian now a series of finite verbs and immediately afterwards 
a eumetochic sentence, to be followed by ametochia and then again 
by eumetochia." l In the light of these facts we are almost forced 
to the conclusion that Lucian is an intentional imitator of Hdt. in 
narrative. Not only has he used paratactic particles as Hdt., and 
produced the " rosary " effect by means of participles, but he has 
combined the two and, what is more to the point here, has changed 
from one to the other in successive sentences or even in the same 
sentence. One feels that there is an effort to tell a story as the 
model story-teller. 2 A few sentences from Lucian will illustrate 
this point : fypd^co TOIVVV irepl a>v /JL^TC elBov /JMJT ejraOov /jLrJTe Trap" 
d\\a)v eirvdo/ji'rjv, eri Be fjbijre 0X0)9 OVTGDV fjujre rrjv dp^rjv yevecrQat, 
BvvafjLevwv. Sib Bel Tot>9 VTvy%dvovTa<; /jbijBa/jLWS Tua-reveiv avrot?. 3 
Immediately after this remarkable statement he begins his narra- 
tive: 6pfj,r]0el<s yap irore diro 'Hpa/cXeiW CTTIJ^WV ical d<f>el$ 9 
TOV ecTTrepiov (b/ceavbv ovpiqy dvefj,(p TOP TT\OVV eTroiov/jbrjv. Notice 
the striking difference between the two sentences and the sudden- 
ness of the transition. The second one is followed by an ametochic 
sentence coordinated by KaL Again : e/ceWev Be apiraa-Oevre^ 
avefj,<p (rtyoBpa) Tpiraioi 6*9 TOV obtceavov dnrir)ve')(67]i^ev t evda rc5 
fdjret, 7rpt,TV%ovT<; Koi avravBpoi, /caraTroOevTes Bvo rj/jLei? fjuovoi 
rcav a\\cov anrodavovrwv ea-(t)0r)fj,ev. 0d'\fravre<; Be roi>9 eraipovs 
Kal vabv rcS IlocreiS&m Bei^dfjLevot, TOVTOVL rbv fiiov w//.ei>, \d%ava 
fiev KTjTrevovTeff, l%0vs Be a-trovfjievot, /cal dfcpoBpva. 7ro\\rj Be, 
(9 opare, 17 v\rj, Kal fjbrjv Kal d/j,7re\ovs e^ei, 7ro\Xa9> d<f> &v 
jjBia-Tos olvo? yLyverai,' Kal rrjv Tryyrjv Be t<ra>9 eiBere Ka\\icrrou 
KOI tyvxporaTOV vBaro?. evvrjv Be dirb TWV <j>v\~\,<ov 
Kal Trvp a<j>6ovov Kaiofjuev Kal opvea Be Orjpevo/juev rd 
Kal fwi/ra9 l^Ovs dypevo/juev egiovres eirl rd Ppay%la TOV Orjpiov, 
evda Kal \ovo^e6a, owoTav eTriQvfjLrjo-Wfjiev.* 

Under figures, only the Gorgianic demand attention here, because 
they are the ones that play an important role in a study of the 
periodic structure of sentences. These figures, though they were 
in existence at the time of Hdt., were just then being developed 

1 lb. 147. 

* V. the entire article of Prof. Gildereleeve in A. J. P. cited above, and his 
introduction to Pindar, p. cix. 
' Ver. Hist. 1. 4-5 (2. 73). *I6. 1. 34 (2. 97-98). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 29 

by his contemporary, Gorgias, but their perfected development 
was not reached until Isocrates. Dr. Robertson, 1 however, 
has shown that Hdt. does use such figures, though sparingly. 
In the narrative portions of the sixth book we have the 
summary: antithesis 14; parison 4; paronomasia 19; pare- 
chesis 1 ; repetition 62. In my first chapter I tried to show 
that it was the ultra-Isocratean spirit that led to bombast and so 
to decay. We, therefore, naturally expect that the revival from 
this decay would present a literature with fewer Gorgianic figures. 
Such is the case. Lucian himself warns against such figures : 
Kal 6 prjrwp Be CTV aTrodov ra>v prj/jbdrcov rrjv Too-avrrjv airepavro- 
\o<yi,av /ecu avruOecreis KOI Trapia-ctMrets KOI TrepioSovs KOI ftapffa- 
picr/jLovs ical ret aXXa {3dpr) r&v \6yc0v. 2 That these figures do not 
abound in Lucian is for us merely a negative argument excluding 
certain influences, and needing support from other more positive 
arguments. It would be absurd to claim that Lucian took his 
few Gorgianic figures from Herodotos' still fewer, but their 
absence bespeaks a style of more simplicity, less periodic, more 
nearly approaching the Herodotean style, which is valuable enough 
when strengthened by positive Herodotean indications, such as 
have been given. The following passage is a fair sample of 
Lucian's repetition and paronomasia, which may include pare- 
chesis, and neither of them occurs even imperfectly more than 15 
times in the first part of Yera Historia : TOVTMV S' ol ftev 
^uXXoToforat eTrl \/ruXX&)z> fjbe<yd\(DV hnrdfovrtu .... ^676^09 8e 
T<OV A/ruXXo>z> oa-ov SooSe/ea eXe^ai/re?. 3 One other short passage 
may serve to illustrate his use of parison, paromoion, and homoio- 
teleuton ; and there are very few examples in his narratives as 
good as this one ; TroXXot fjuev fwz^re? rjKla-Kovro, TroXXot Se KOI 

In his chapter, De Verborum Ubertate, Grundmann very 
properly warns against being too dogmatic in claiming Herodotean 
influence when certain peculiarities of language or construction 
found in his works exist also in most, if not all, of the best Attic 
writers. But he claims with equal propriety the right to assert 

1 The Gorgianic Figures in Early Greek Prose. 

Dial. Mort. 10 (1. 374). Ver. Hist. 1. 13 (2. 80). 

I&. 1. 17 (2. 84). 

30 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Arrian's dependence on Hdt. along this line, de verborum ubertate, 
whenever the writings of the two abound in identically the same 
characteristics, which others use more sparingly. He says, e. g., 
that such expressions as peyeOei peyas and 7r\ij0e'i yue^o-rc?, etc. 
go back to Hdt. Schmid 1 is authority for the statement that such 
expressions were common among writers of Lucian' s time, being 
especially frequent in Aelian. Note the following from Lucian : 
d\\a /cat 7r6\iv rjBr) ev rfj Meo-OTrora/u'a a>/acre fiueyeOet, re /jbeyio-Trjv 
KCLI Ka\\LC7T'rji> ) and ol/cov Be T? lBa)v jjueyedei, /AeyicrTov fcal icd\\ei, 
icd\\Lcrrov * Grundmann 8 further points out that Hdt. and Arrian 
often repeat a preceding thought and by means of pev oppose it to 
what follows. Lucian follows the same practice, but in a little 
different way. He summarizes or confirms or reasserts in a short 
additional clause added often by Be or some similar particle, or by 
ovTft)?, or without any particle. In Philopseudes 4 he sums up a 
long sentence : o/ro>5 droTra Birjyelro. Again, after a marvelous 
story which reminds one of the Bible : TOO-OVTOV fj etrpBr) eBvvrjOvj 
KOI 6 o-r^XtTT/? cKeivos Xt#o?. 6 In the next section, after more 
marvels : eTrel Be crvvrj\io-0r)crav t eve^vcrrjae /JLCV avra 6 Ba/3iA,ftmo9, 
T^ Be avriica, fjid\a icareicauOri air avra VTTO rc5 fyvo-rHJuari, ^yuet? Be 
eOavfid^o/jiev, where the very last clause seems very natural to a 
reader of Hdt. More nearly approaching Grundmann's illustra- 
tions is a summary in Tcae Histories : rotavTrj fiev teal 6 QaeOcov 
TrapcKT/cevfj. 6 Again : Toiavrrj fiev TJ %copa ea-rLv V/JLCIS Be 
r) opav OTTO)? 7 . . . . ; and ravra /JLCV ra Kara rrjv vr)o-opa%Lav 
yevo/jieva, 8 the conclusion of the first part. Lucian makes use of 
rotovTQ- r Toaovros in such summaries more than Hdt., who 
seems to prefer OVTCO or OVTCO Btf, evOavra By, or the repetition 
of the verb. After i < ascription of the terms of a peace 
between the inhabitants n ;.* the sun and the inhabitants of 
the moon, Lucian says : roiavrrj fj,ev 17 elprjvrj eyevero? In 
like manner he concludes a description of food and its prepara- 
tion : <TiT(p /j,ev Brj rptyovTai rotour^). 10 Such conclusions with 

J Att. 1. 312 and 418. 

Hist. Conscrib. 31 (2. 42), De Domo 1 (3. 190). p. 35. 

4 5 (3. 34). 6 11 (3. 39). 6 1. 16 (2. 83). 

n. 36(2. 99). 8 1.42(2. 104). 

Ver. Hist. 1. 21 (2. 86). 10 16., 1. 23 (2. 88). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 31 

forms of ouT09 are not hard to find. At the end of Odysseus' 
letter to Calypso we find : ravra fj,ev e$ij\ov rj eVtcrroXTJ, KOI rrepl 
rj/jLwv, OTTO)? gevifrOwjijLev. 1 At the close of part two, the whole of 
the True Histories is summarized in six lines beginning ravra fj,ev. 
The significance of such examples is materially heightened by their 
remarkable frequency in all of Lucian's narrative, especially True 

All the foregoing evidence both affirms and is strengthened by 
the fact that Lucian's style resembles the style of Hdt. in its 
straightforward method of telling a story. There is not only 
opOoTijs pure, the use of the nominative which carries with it the 
use of the finite verb usually in the indicative in narrative, but 
also the use of the participle not in the genitive absolute con- 
struction nor in any oblique case, to any extent, which is the sign 
of Tr^ayiao-fAos connoting Trepi/BoXij and cre/^voT?;?. 2 The rhetori- 
cians are construed as believing that such a use of the participle is 
to be classed under rrKayiao-pos along with the genitive absolute, 
but it appeals to me more as a pleasing variety of opQorys, if 
opOoTfj*; means straightforwardness. Granted, as the rhetoricians 
contend, that the participle, whatever its construction, is a a^rjfjba 
7Tpi/3\r)T(,K6v, is one of those forms that bring about 7rep(,/3o\rj, we 
still contend that both Hdt. and Luc. secure the effect of straight- 
forward narrative by the use of the partk'ple as well as by the use 
of the finite verb, the alternation of eumetochia and ametochia in 
both authors having been previously noticed. As an example of 
opOoTTj? in Luc. : avrrj fiev rj rov 'EySu/uft)!^ Svva/jiis rjv. (T/cevrj 
8e rrdvrtov 77 avrrj" Kpdvq fiev CLTTO rcov /cvdfjLW fj,yd\a { 'p Trap" 
avrois ol KvafLOt, /cal /caprepoi" Otopafces Se (f>o\iScoruv nrdvTes 
rd yap \e7rrj r&v Oep/jucnv o-vpk>d7r~ovT$ TTQIOVVTCU Oa)pa- 
appr)KTov 8' etcei jLyverai, rov J ( 9f TO Xe7T09 &(T7rep icepa$' 
Se real gi^r) ola rd 'EtXhyviKa. 3 Compare with this the 
beginning of the narrative in True Histories : op/ii?0el? yap irore 
diro 'Hpa/eXetW <TTri\S)v KOI d(f>el<$ e? rbv eairepiov toiceavov ovpiq) 
dvefjuq) rov TT\OVV eTroiov/jLrjv ; 4 and again : . . . . 'jrpocreve' 
avrrj ical 6p/jbHrd/jLvoi, airk^^v, eTTio-fcoTrovvres Se rrjv 

1 2b., 2. 35 (2. 131). Cf. A. J. P. ix, 140 ff. 

Ver. Hist. 1. 14 (2. 81). * 1. 5. (2. 73). 

32 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

ol/cov/jievrjv. . . .* Allowing that the effect of the parti- 
ciple is to retard the movement somewhat in these and hundreds of 
similar passages in Luc. and Hdt. does not detract from the simplicity 
or clearness or the straightforward method of the narrative. It is 
in a sense 6p66rrj<; connoting /caOaporrjs and a<e\em ; and both 
Hdt. and Luc. abound in this general character of narrative inter- 
changed with pure opOoTr)?, to the exclusion of irKa^/iao-pos, or 
dependency, or genitive absolute. Their coordination of participles 
is in keeping with their coordination of particles. 


This chapter might easily constitute a book in itself with three 
chapters, one each for language, constructions, and material, but 
lack of space forbids. 

Notwithstanding the fact already noted that comedy, Plato, and 
Xenophon are the principal sources of the Renascence for words, 
Schmid gives 85 words which he claims Ltician has taken from 
Herodotos and other Ionic writers not including Hippocrates. 
There are besides 300 words in the Lucianic corpus which have 
been used by Hdt. in common with one or more of the standard 
writers, and more than 200 that have been used by Hdt. in com- 
mon with the poets, mostly Homer and the tragedians. Take, 
e. g., three uncommon words in Somn. 2 : /Saz/aucro? KOI ^et/xwz/af 
/cat a7TO%t/3oy8tft)T09. The first one is used by Soph., Ar., Xen., 
Plat.; the second by Hdt., 8 Soph, as an adj. in a fragment, Euri- 
pides in another sense in a fragment ; the third by Hdt. 4 and Xen. 6 
As in the case of these last two, so in many other cases of the 500 
taken from Hdt. and others in common, Hdt. should be placed 
first because the word is used by him more prominently or more 

1. 10 (2. 77). 9 (1. 14). J . 95 and 2. 141. 

3. 42. 6 Cyr. 8. 3.37. 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 33 

frequently. V. Du Mesnil 1 for certain unusual forms. He gives 
ovSafjioOi, for ovSa/jbov 2 as Ionic; also rjpv^crd^v for rjpvrjOrjv* 
as used only by the poets and Ionic writers and once by Aes- 
chines. But this department is the least fruitful for the whole 

Only a few unusual constructions will be mentioned, but enough 
to show Lucian's great familiarity with Hdt. and the extent to 
which he was influenced by Herodotean peculiarities. Schmid 4 
and Du Mesnil 5 call attention to the joining of an accusative with 
an article as a Herodotean peculiarity among the ancients and a 
Lucianic peculiarity among the later writers : 6'<rrt<? ouro? o Trpocnwv 
, 6 Kepa(T<f)6po<;, o Trjv (rvpiyya, 6 Xacrto? etc rotv o~fC6\oiv ; 6 7ro0ev 
eTret,o-eKVK\rfdr]G-av OVTOL rj 6 Mt^p7/? e/ceivos 6 M?}8o9 o TOV 
/cdvSvv /cal TTJV Tidpav ; 7 r) Ba/3fXa>i> Se aoi e/ceivrj etrrlv rj evTrvpyo? 
rj rov peyav 7repif3o\ov. 8 Du Mesnil agrees with Matthiae 427 b in 
explaining the phenomenon by the omission of e%a>i>. In the Hero- 
dotean examples the article seems not to be expressed, though the 
e^cov is to be supplied in the same way : TOU? Se epa-evas (/Soi)?) 
/carapvcro-ovo-t, e/cao-roi, ev rolcri, Trpoaa-TeLoicn, TO icepas TO eTepov rj 
KOL a/jL^oTepa vTrepe'XpvTa, sc. e%oi^ra9. 9 

7Tpi with dat. for irepL with ace. is rarely used by the ancients 
except the Ionic writers and the poets. V. Du Mesnil 10 and Lund- 
berg. 11 The one says it is frequent in Hdt., the other in Lucian : 
a7Torcv\i,ofj,6Vovs 67Tt K<pa\rjv evLoTi /cal TroXXa TpavfiaTa Xa/jifid- 
vowras Trepl rpa^etat? rat9 Trer/oat?. 12 

Merriam 13 says that " the third attributive position is a favorite 
with Hdt. and his admirer, Lucian, but not very common in the 

1 Grammatica, Quam Lucian us in Scriptis Suis Secutus Est, Eatio cum Anti- 
quorum Atticorum Ratione Comparatur, pp. 4-6. 

I Hermot. 3. 1 (1. 771). 3 Dial. Mer. 7. 4 (3. 298). 

* 1. 234. 6 p. 9. 6 Bis. Ace. 9 (2. 801), cf. ib. t 19 (2. 814). 

7 Deor. Cone. 9 (3. 533). Char. 23 (1. 522) cf. ib. 14 (1. 509). 

9 Hdt. 2. 41 ; cf. 2. 134, 4. 71, etc. 10 p. 38. 

II De Eatione Herodotea Praepositionibus Utendi a Scriptoribus Atticis Di versa, 
1869, p. 26. 

11 Cf. Luc. Ehet. Praec. 3 (3. 4) ; ib., 18 (3. 20) ; De Domo 7 (3. 194) ; De Hist. 
Conscr. 23 (2. 31), etc. 
13 V. note to Hdt. 6. 22. 3. 

34 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

best Attic." The original authority of this note l has modified his 
statement 2 after a farther examination of Lucian. The only place 
in which he uses the third position with any frequency at all is, 
as we would expect, the narrative passage, True Histories. Here 
there are a dozen examples and about the same number of the 
second position, the first largely predominating everywhere. 

Schmid 3 calls attention to Lucian's not infrequent practice of 
throwing back the accent of dissyllabic prepositions, especially 
TrepL Of the ancient prose writers only Hdt. and Plato follow 
this practice to any extent. It cannot be claimed that Lucian 
followed either of these or the poets, but two facts are interesting, 
that when he calls up Hdt. 4 and makes him talk Ionic, there is an 
anastrophic Tre/n, and that in the Syrian Goddess, which I have 
tried to establish in another place 5 as a Lucianic composition, vre/H 
is found no less than 15 times. 

Sommerbrodt 6 remarks that &>9 for &crre is to be found in Hdt. 
and the Attic poets. It is frequently found in Lucian. 

Lucian takes another liberty with Attic prose, the use of ovSe for 
KOL ov, for which his only authority could be Hdt. or the poets : 
/cat vvv crv TOV KtOapwBov .... dva\a/3a)v e^evrjga) e? Taivapov .... 
ovSe TreptetSe? /ca/ew? VTTO rwv vavrwv a7ro\\vfievov^ The Syrian 
Goddess has several examples of this also. 

It is possible that at times Lucian tried to cover up his tracks, 
so to speak, and was intentionally at variance with the writers of 
whom he was fond. In Somn., 8 where the Teubner text reads o><?, 
Sommerbrodt changes to eZ? on the strength of similar passages in 
Hdt., 9 where in each case 6/9 is used with persons, as here, for the 
more usual TT/DO? or &>?, and also as here after the same word, 

1 V. note to Prof. Gildersleeve's edition of Justin Martyr, 1, C. 6. 7. 

1 Amer. Jour. Phil. 6. 262. 

3 1. 234. * De Domo 20 (3. 202). 

5 Studies in Honor of B. L. Gildersleeve. 

6 V. note on Luc. Char. 23 (1. 521) : &s - ^ ve\Kfj<rat. 

T Dial. Mar. 8. 1 (1. 308), cf. Khet. Praec. 16 (3. 17); Dial. Meretr. 7. 3 
(3. 297); Gall. 14 (2. 724); Prom. 1 (1. 23); etc. 
8 12 (1. 18). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 35 

Du Mesnil 1 has called attention to the expression Ufa TTOV \eycov 
in Lucian. This pleonasm is frequent in Hdt. 2 

The expression ov fypovrls 'iTTTroicheiSrj used by Hdt. 3 passed 
into a proverb and is used by Lucian. 

Lucian warns his readers at the opening of the True Histories 
that not a word he is to utter has any truth in it, so that he can 
be free from that deception and untruthfulness exemplified in 
previous story-tellers who expected people to believe their every 
word. But he seems to forget this as he becomes interested in the 
story and makes a number of statements that sound familiar to 
readers of Hdt. ; e. g., rather than make a plain statement, he 
writes : eXeyoz/ro Se teal a,7rb r&v virep rrjv KaTTTraSo/ciav aa-repwv 
fi%ew .... TOVTOV ? eya) OVK eOeaa-dfjirjv. 4 And in the same section : 
TepdaTia yap KOI aTncrra Trepl avrwv e\eyovTo. Again : TO fjbevroi, 
7r\f}0o<? avr&v OVK dveypatya, JULY) r&> /cal airiarov &6%rj, roaovrov TJV* 

Many interesting verbal correspondences and other points of 
interest might be cited, but no further mention of such will be 
made except in connection with the treatment of subject matter. 
Lucian and the Renascence in general had a great deal of what we call 
the classic literature, how much, we cannot tell, from which to draw, 
so that we must not always trace to Hdt. as a source what is com- 
mon property. We can, of course, use here what is peculiar to 
Hdt., especially when other similarities exist. In fact, in view of 
the preceding arguments, that Herodotos' influence upon Lucian 
in the sphere of story-telling is especially marked, we have more 
right to claim Hdt. as the original source even of many stories 
found elsewhere. Many of the references given are only sugges- 
tions of comparisons, while those given more in detail furnish 
stronger evidence. The same may be said of Dio Chr. to whom 
parallel references are given. I have followed the order of Hdt., 
and from this point put all references in the text. 

Jo. V. Hdt. 1. 1, 1. 5, 2. 4. Cf. Luc., Deor. Dial. 3 (1. 207); 
Mar. Dial. 7 (i. 305-307); Salt. 43 (2. 293). Cf. Dio (Teubner 
text) vol. 1, p. 100, 1. 8 (Oration 11. 40). 

1 p. 58, note on Luc. Dem. Enc. 15 (3. 502). 
2 1. 118 ; 3. 156 ; 5. 36, 49. V. Stein to the first passage. 
6. 129 ; cf. Luc. Here. 8 (3. 86) ; [Philopatr.] 29 (3. 618) ; Apolog. 15 (1. 724). 
Each of the last two ends a work. 4 Ver. Hist. 1. 13 (2. 80). 

*/6., 1. 18 (2. 84) ; cf. i&., 1. 25 (2. 90) and Philops. 16 (3. 44). 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Europa. V. Hdt. 1. 2. Cf. Luc., Mar. Dial. 15 (1. 325-327) ; 
D. D. S. 4 (3. 453). It is interesting to note the exact correspond- 
ence of the account in the D. D. S. with that of Lucian, even 
though it is a little abbreviated. 

Croesus. Lucian has drawn largely upon Hdt. for all he has to 
say about Croesus ; in fact, the correspondence is too evident to 
admit of discussion. Hdt's. account of Croesus is given, for the 
most part, in the first book, chapters 7-94. Chs, 8-12 tell how 
his house came into power. Cf. Luc. [Asin.] 28 (2. 597). Cf. 
Dio 2. 214. 18 (Or. 64.27). General references to Croesus' great 
wealth are: Luc., Tim. 23 (1. 137); Navig. 26 (3. 265); Mort. 
Dial. 2. 2 (1. 337). The famous dialogue between Croesus and 
Solon, Hdt. 1. 30-33, has a very close parallel in Luc., Char. 
9 ff. (1. 501 ff.). To Charon Hermes points out Croesus in his 
palace at Sardis talking with Solon the Athenian. In general, 
there is very little difference between the two accounts. Hdt. 
makes Tellos the first in happiness, while the story about Cleobis 
and Biton is second. Lucian reverses the order, but assigns the 
same reasons in each case as Hdt. 




o-avpovs KOI 00-09 acrrj/jiosxpv 0-09 
ea-Tiv rifuv Kal rrjv a\\r)v 

7TO\VT\l,aV, 17T fJLOl, TLVO, 




TeXXo9 o 'A0ifWM05 09 
e/3ta> teal airkOavev VTrep rf)<! 


K\6vo-avTO<; Kpot<rou TOV So- 
\cova QepaTTOvres Trepifjyov tcara 
Tou? dycravpovs, teal eTriSei/c- 
vvarav Trdvra eovra fjieyaka re 
ical o\/3i,a .... eipero 6 K/ooto-o? 
raSe- %elv 'AOrjvale .... vvv 
<!)v i/j,po<i eTreipeaOai /JLOI eV^X- 
Oe, i Tiva rjSij Travrow 


TeXXo) .... TOV fiiov v TJKOVTI, 
a>9 r^ Trap* fjfuv, T\evTrj TOV 

yap ' ^Qj]valoi(Ti fjud- 

7T/909 TOU9 d(7TVy6LTOVa<; h 

orjOrja-as Kal Tpo- 
Troiijcras T&V 7roXe//,t&>i> 

Herodotos in the 
6 Sevrepos $e rls av elr) ; 
&> Se &v olSa K\eo/3iv /cal 

Greek Renascence. 37 

bra, riva SevTepov per 

TOU? ryevecrOai,, TOVS rfjs lepeias 
s TT}? 'ApyoOev. 

OVTO<S rovs a 

vTas, eirel rrjv 

e f i\K.vcrav eirl Tr/9 
Tnjvrjs a^pi jrpbs TO lepov. 

) $e, w /cddapfjua, ov aroi 

elvcu ; 

BeTTco olSa, w Kpotcre, $}v pr) 
o? TO TeXo? a(f>iKrj rov ySt 


KXeoyStz^ T real BtVwz/a. TOU- 
TOtcri yap eov 

eee TTCLVTO)^ rrjv 
avrwv %evyel tcofjLicrOfjvai, e? TO 

IpOV .... U7ToSwT9 aVTol V7TO 

rrjv ev<y\r)v elXicov rrjv a/j,al;av, 
eVt TT}? afjud^fj^ Se <r<t>i a>^e 

w geive'A.O'rjvcue, f) Se 

e<? TO prj&ev, axrre ovSe l&icorewv 
avbpwv dgiovs ^//.ea? eTro^o-a?. 
eicelvo Be, TO etpeo pe, ov KCO 
are eya) \<yo), Trplv av 
o-avra /ca\W9 TOV al&va 

Lucian next follows Hdt. in giving the history of Croesus* 
children. With Hdt. 1. 134 and 1. 43 cf. Luc., Jup. Conf. 12 
(2. 635-6). Both make mention of the two sons of Croesus, one of 
them /e<0$o9 according to both. V. Hdt. 1. 34; Luc. Pro Imag. 
20 (2. 500) ; Gall. 25 (2. 741). 

Again, we have strikingly similar accounts of the answers given 
to Croesus when in his jealousy and alarm at the success of the 
Persian power he sent messengers to various oracles. With Hdt. 
1. 47, and 1. 48 cf. Luc., Jup. Conf. 14 (2. 637); Jup. Trag. 30 
(2. 676). Also Hdt. 1. 43 with Luc., Jup. Conf. 14 (2. 637). 

Among many other gifts sent to win the favor of the Delphian 
oracle mentioned by Hdt., 1. 50-51, was a large amount of gold 
which was made into half-plinths or bricks, r]^Lir\ivQia. Here, 
then, is where Lucian gets sections 11-12 of his Charon. Cf. Jup. 
Trag. 30 (2. 676.) 

Again, Hdt., 1. 75, and Luc., [Hipp.] 2 (3. 68), give similarly 
the plan by which Thales the Milesian enabled Croesus to lead his 

38 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

army across the river Halys. Cf. Luc. Jup. Conf. 14 (2. 637) and 
Jup. Trag. 20 (2. 664), 43 (2. 691). 

Once more, the story comes from Hdt. about the battle with 
Cyrus, the defeat and capture of Croesus, the penalty adjudged 
him, and his marvelous escape by calling upon Solon and later 
upon Apollo. V. Hdt. 1. 86; cf. Luc., Char. 13 (1. 508): 
/jLe/Avrjaerai, S' ovv [iiKpov varepov rov 2)oXft>i>O9, orav avrov Serf 
d\ovra eVl rrjv irvpav VTTO rov Kvpov dva^dijvai . . . . cf. Gall. 
23 (2. 737). 

The only reference of importance from Dio is 1. 164. 25 (Or. 
10. 26), where he is in full agreement with Hdt. in summarizing 
the history of Croesus in connection with the Persians. 

Cyrus. His history begins Hdt. 1. 107. Cf. especially 1. 122 : 
KarkjBaXov fydriv a>9 e/CKeifjievov Kvpov KVWV e^eOpetye with Luc. 
Sacr. 5 (1. 530): o Hepanjs Kvpo? 6 irporepov VTTO -7-179 tcvvos. 
With Hdt. 1. 123-130, relating especially to Astyages, cf. Dio 
1. 265. 21 (Or. 15.22); 1. 312. 16. (Or. 25. 5); 2. 292. 18 (Or. 
80. 12). Cyrus' connection with Babylon is given, Hdt. 1. 178- 
200. Cf. 1. 103, 106 ; 2. 150 for mention of Nineveh ; cf. Luc., 
Char. 13 (1. 521-2) and Dio 1. 73. 27 (Or. 4. 53). Hdt. 1. 214 
gives an account of Cyrus' death, how he was defeated by the 
Massagetai, how Tomyris, the ruler of the Massagetai, filled a 
skin with human blood and put Cyrus' head in it : CKTKOV e 
7T\rj(7aa-a aiparos dvOpwTnjtov Tofjuvpw IBL^fjro ev rolcri reOve&cri, 
Tlepcrecov rbv Jfivpov veicvv, a$9 Se evpe, evaTrrJKe avrov rrjv 
)v 9 rov aa-Kov. Cf. Luc., [Macr.] 14 (3. 217) and especially 
Char. 13 (1. 508): Kpoteroi/ /JLCV d\wvai, VTTO Kvpov, K.vpov Se 
avrbv VTT Ifcewrjcrl r^9 M.a<ro-ayeTi,bo$ dirodavelv. . . . To/j,vpi,<$ 
l/ceivr) eeri, ical rrjv /ce^aXrjz/ 76 aTrore/iouo-a rov Kvpov avrrj e? 
da-Kov enPa\el Tr^prj at>aro9. Cf. Ver. Hist. 2. 17 (2. 114). 

Libyan History. V. Hdt. 2. 32-150; 4. 43, 168-186, 191-2. 
Cf. Lucian's Dipsas entire, noting the word dipsas in connection 
with Herodotos' facts. Cf. Dio 1. 90. 13 (Or. 5. 1 ff.); 2. 130. 
14 (Or. 47. 4). 

Heracles, Alcmene, Amphitryon. V. Hdt. 2. 43. Cf. Luc. 
[Charid.] 6 (3. 621); Dial. Deor. 10 (1. 229-30). 

Paris, Helen. V. Hdt. 2. 112 ff. Dio 1. 178. 14 (Or. 11. 41) 
gives the same account, but repudiates the tradition of Hdt. and 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 39 

discusses the whole myth very extensively in Or. 11. V. Hague, 
Quaestiones Dioneae, 1887, p. 47. 

Cambyses has been treated quite fully by Hdt., bk. 3, in con- 
nection with Egyptian history. Cf. Luc. Char. 13 (1. 509). Cf. 
Dio 1. 312. 21 (Or. 25. 5); 2. 251. 15 (Or. 73. 2). Note in par- 
ticular the account of the dishonor done the dead body of Amasis 
by Cambyses, Hdt. 3. 16 and Dio 2. 305. 32 (Corinthiaca 37). 
On Egyptian worship in general, v. Hdt. 3. 27-29 ; 2. 42 ; espe- 
cially 4. 181. Cf. Luc. Deor. Concil. 10 and 11 (3. 533-4); 
Sacr. 15 (1. 539). Cf. [Astrol.] 7-8 (2. 363-4). 

India. V. Hdt. 3. 94-105. Cf. Luc. [Asm.] 53 (2. 621); 
[Amor.] 41 (2. 442) ; Gall. 16 (2. 726). 

Arabia. V. Hdt. 3. 107-113. Cf. Luc. Ver. Hist. 2. 5 (2. 
107) ; D. D. S. 30 (3. 477). 

Poly crates, Maeander, Oroetes. V. Hdt. 3. 120-125. Cf. 3. 39. 
Cf. Luc., Char. 14 (1. 510); Necyom. 16 (1. 478-9); Navig. 26 
(3. 265) ; Salt. 54 (2. 298). Cf. Dio 1. 276. 27 (Or. 17. 15). 

Zopyrus. Hdt. gives very fully, 3. 153-60, the story about 
Zopyrus at the siege of Babylon. He hacked himself up terribly 
and, presenting himself to the Babylonians, complained that he 
had been maltreated by Darius, and offered to serve the Baby- 
lonians against the Persians. He was received and rapidly rose in 
favor by reason of his prowess, and by a number of times killing 
or capturing bands of Persians intentionally put into his hands by 
Darius according to previous agreement. Finally, at the proper 
time, he turned over the city to Darius. Hdt. adds, 3. 160 : TroXXa- 
KIS &e Aapelov \eyerai, yvcoprjv rtfvSe aTroSegacrOat,, cos /3ov\oiTo 
civ ZtcoTTVpov elvau aTradea TTJS acuce'iys fjid\\ov vj Ba/SvXwi/a? ol 
el/cocn TTpo? TTJ eovcry TrpocryevecrQcu. Cf. Luc., Jup. Trag. 53 (2. 
701) : ttXXa, co f ftp/A?), TO TOV Aapetou irdvv #aXo>9 e%oi/ eVrtV, o 
elnrev errl TOV Ttwrrvpow wcrre ical auro? e'/3ouXoyLt?7i> av eva TOLOVTOV 
e%eiv olov TOV Aa/ui> ^vfjufjua^ov rj iivpLas poi J$a/3v\a>vas VTT- 
dpxeiv. Cf. D. D. S. 25 (3. 471), where the appeal made to Com- 
babus seems very similar to that of Darius to Zopyrus, Hdt. 3. 
155. Also the honors heaped upon Zopyrus remind us of the 
honors here given Combabus. Note, too, that Combabus is granted 
permission to go to the king unannounced, which has a decided 
parallel in Hdt. 3. 84, 118. 

40 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 

Aristeas. V. Hdt. 4. 14, 15. Of. Dio 2. 306. 25 (Corinthiaca 37). 

Scythians. Cf. Hdt. 4. 26 and Luc., Deor. Dial. 16. 1 (1. 
243-4). Cf. Hdt. 4. 62 and Luc., Jup. Trag. 42 (2. 690) ; Sacr. 
13 (1. 537), etc. Cf. Hdt. 4. 70 and Luc., Tox. (?) 36-8 (2. 
544-6). Cf. Hdt. 4. 85 and Luc., [Ner.] 2 (3. 637). Cf. Dio 1. 
312, 24 (Or. 25. 5) ; 1. 72. 8 (Or. 4. 45). Cf. Hdt. 4. 94-5 and 
Luc., Deor. Concil. 9 (3. 533) ; Yer. Hist. 2. 17 (2. 114). Cf. Hdt. 
4. 107 and Dio 2. 50. 15 (Or. 36. 7). 

The Toxaris, which Guttentag says does not belong to Lucian 
because it is too carefully imitative of him, furnishes many paral- 
lels to Hdt. So his Anacharsis may be connected with Hdt. 4, 
46, 76, 77. 

Clisthenes of Sicyon. Y. Hdt. 5. 67 and cf. 6, 126. Cf. Dio 1. 
46. 21 (Or. 3. 41) ; 1. 180. 3 (Or. 11. 47). 

Pan (Datis and Artaphernes). Cf. Hdt. 6, 94 and Luc., Bis 
Ace. 9 (2. 801). Cf. Hdt. 6. 105 and Luc., Bis Ace. 9 (2. 801) ; 
Dial. Deor. 22. 3 (1. 271-2). With these passages cf. Hdt. 2. 46, 
145 and Luc., Philops. 3 (3. 32). Cf. Dio 1. 211. 10 (Or. 11. 
148). This is a very interesting study. 

Alcmaeon. Y. Chap. Ill under Dio Chr. 

Cimon. Y. Hdt. 6, 136. Cf. Dio 2. 252. 29 (Or. 73. 6). 

Xerxes. His history is given by Hdt. in books 7 and 8. Cf. 
Luc., Dem. Enc. 32 (3. 514) ; Rhet. Praec. 18 (3. 20) ; Dial. Mort. 
20. 2 (1. 412). Cf. Dio 1. 72. 7 (Or. 4. 45); 1. 211. 15 (Or. 11. 
148); 1. 247. 30 (Or. 13. 23); etc. 

Nisaean Horses. V. Hdt. 7. 40. Cf. Luc., Hist. 39 (2. 52). 
Cf. Dio 2. 61. 15 (Or. 36. 41). 

Themistodes. Y. Hdt. 7. 141-2. Cf. Luc., Jup. Trag. 31 (2. 
678). Cf. Dio 2. 252. 22 (Or. 73. 5). 

Boreas and Orithya. Y. Hdt. 7. 189. Cf. Luc., Salt. 40 (2. 
292); Philops. 3 (3. 32). 

Leonidas. Y. Hdt. 7. 204. Cf. Luc., Rhet. Praec. 18 (3. 20). 
Cf. Dio 1. 211. 15 (Or. 11. 148); 2. 283. 30 (Or. 78. 40). 

Salamis. Y. Hdt. 7. 228 ; 8. 5, 59, 61, 94, etc. Cf. Luc., Rhet. 
Praec. 18 (3. 20). Cf. Dio 1. 210. 15 (Or. 11. 145); 2. 298. 11 
(Or. Corin.) ; 2. 295. 4 (Or. Corin.). 

The story of Periander and Arion, Hdt. 1. 23-4, has been held 
in reserve for a little more careful inspection. The accounts of 

Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 


both Lucian and Dio are very similar to the account of Hdt., even 
in phraseology, but only the former will be given. Cf. Luc., Mar. 
Dial. 8 (1. 308-9). Naturally, Lucian's account is much shorter 
than that of Hdt., and he has omitted some parts altogether, but 
there is the same beginning, the same substance, the same style 
the same 




v7ro\a/36vTa Igevei/cai, eVt 

^Apiova . . . eovTa /ciOap&Sbv 
TWV rore eovTCDV ovSevbs Sev- 
Tepov, /cat S(,0vpa/jL/3ov 

dv0p(t)7T(DV TC0V 77/1,669 

iroLrjcravTa re /cat ovvopdcravTa 

. . . 7TO\\OV TOV 

jSovra Trapa He 

lir(,Qv^r]<jai TrXwcra^ 69 'Ira- 
\irjv re /cat '^iKeX.i'rjv, Ipjaad- 
pevov Se xpijfjLaTa /j,eyd\a 0- 
\fja-ai, OTrlcra) 69 K.6pw6ov diri/ce- 



'Apiova e/c/3a\6v- 

ovro) Sotceoi,, 7Tpt,i8eiv avrbv ev 
rfj o-icevfj irdar) o-rdvra ev TOICTI 


TOV Be evbvvTa re Traeraz/ TTJV 
<T/cevrjv /cat \a/3ovTa Trjv KiQd- 
prjv, crTavTa ev Toim eSa)\ioicri 
Siej;\0e2v VO/JLOV TOV opOiov . . . 
pl-^rai fjLiv 69 Trjv 6d\ao~crav 

VTro\a{3ct)v It-evrjgd/jL'rjv 69 

6 HepiavSpos, ol/j,at,, fyaipev 
/cal 7ro\Xa^ 


o Se 7T\ouT77o-a9 irapa TOV 
TVpdvvov eTreOvfjuTjo'e 7r\evo-a<$ 
ot/caSe e*9 Trjv Mij6vfj,vav eVtSe/f - 
ao~0ai TOV TT\OVTOV. 

eVel Kara /j,eo-ov TO Aljalov 
eyevovTO, e 
ol vavTai. 

eVel TavTa vfuv 
, d\\d Trjv o~/cevr)v dva\a- 
fie /cal aaavTa Opfjvov 
Tiva eV e/jLavT<p e/covTa edo~aT 

dve\afte TTJV (ncevrjv /cal fjo~e 
Trdvv \iyvpov, /cal eirecrev 6*9 



Books not returned on time are subject to a fine of 
50c per volume after the third day overdue, increasing 
to $1.00 per volume after the sixth day. Books not in 
demand may be renewed if application is made before 
expiration of loan period. 


JAN 3 1963