The differences between the primary Homeric and Herodotean narrators are manifest: the former is covert and omniscient (thanks to the Muses), the latter overt and limited by his human (re)sources in exploring the past and other foreign countries. Both authors use secondary narratorial surrogates in order to highlight their own achievement in preserving the kleos of remarkable deeds. While Homeric surrogates from the heroic past (e.g., the bard Demodocus and the bard-like storyteller Odysseus) model expertise and status that the human bard aspires to in his own performance, Herodotus casts a more critical eye on the post-heroic inquiries of his textual avatars, whether “professional” (Hecataeus and Aristagoras) or “amateur” (typically monarchic investigations of foreign cultures, undertaken for personal profit). In a metatextual move without Homeric precedent, the experiences of advisor figures who are assimilated to the Herodotean narrator shed light on the strengths and limitations of knowledge gained through historiē.