[Herodotus2010] Herodotus Conference Call RSVP

[Andre Stipanovic]

Dear fellow Herodotus readers,
In anticipation of our discussion tomorrow evening, would you please RSVP
me so I can get an idea of who will be able to make the call?
Thanks, and I look forward to discussing the battle of Marathon with you.
Sincerely,
Andre


Our next call is scheduled for Monday Feb 7 @8pm EST.
Phone #:  1888 350 0075
Conference code:  1100494#


Herodotus Book Six Discussion Questions

1. In Book VI ch. 30, Histiaeus’ end at the hands of Artaphrenes and
Harpagos is related in gruesome but cursory fashion:  “they took him to
Sardis and there hanged him from a stake.  But they embalmed his head and
brought it to King Darius in Susa” (p. 437).  Just prior to this remark,
Herodotus himself tells the reader that in his opinion “if, after being
captured alive, Histiaeos had been taken to Darius, I suppose that Darius
would have forgiven him for his offense and that he would have suffered no
harm” (437).  Knowing what we know about Darius in the Histories, would
that be an accurate prediction?  Why does Herodotus feel this way and what
evidence from earlier in our reading could support his assertion?

2.  In chs. 51-55, Herodotus digresses on the origins of the Spartan dual
kingship.  He comments on both the Spartan version and the common Greek
traditional version.  What are we to make of the story?  Is Herodotus
favoring one or the other?  Are there other versions deliberately not
mentioned by Herodotus?  Why does Herodotus suddenly proclaim: “let that
be the extent of what is said on this topic” (449)?

3.  In ch. 84, Herodotus presents various views on the Spartan king
Kleomenes’ madness and eventual death.  After presenting the Argive and
Spartan explanations, Herodotus claims: “For myself, I think that the
best explanation is that Kleomenes was punished for his treatment of
Demaratos” (460).  What does this say about Herodotus’ judgment?  Is
he taking sides or does he have justification, according to his evidence,
that his assertion has credence?  What does this remark say about
Herodotus’ regard for history in general?

4.  Herodotus uses 94 chapters to set the stage for one of the most
important battles in history.  Given the actual details of the battle, why
does Herodotus not go into more detail about the individuals and events on
the battlefield?  How does Herodotus contrast the Athenians to the
Persians in this conflict?  How is Sparta compared/contrasted with Athens?
 Persia??

5.  Ch. 121 just seems to leap out of nowhere.  After a description of the
battle of Marathon and Sparta’s late arrival, Herodotus seems eager to
address the veracity of Alkmeonid treachery against Athens:  “I am
astonished by that story about the Alcmeonids” (478).  He then goes on
to elaborate on the Alcmeonid clan, seemingly making an appeal for them,
through chapter 131.  How convincing is his defense?  Why does Herodotus
make this appeal here?  What sort of tensions are betrayed in Herodotus’
words that show the movement between myth and history, fact and fiction?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://readingodyssey.org/pipermail/herodotus2010_readingodyssey.org/attachments/20110206/a0663f18/attachment-0002.html>