We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
I put forward a new suggestion here about what John Marincola in an important paper called ‘the narrator’s presence’ in Herodotus’ Histories.1 I reconsider, in particular, a number of claims of autopsy and suggest on that basis that it is sometimes illuminating to think of Herodotus as adopting the role of tour guide or, rather, virtual tour guide. My arguments involve a view about Herodotus’ ‘good faith’ or ‘trustworthiness’ that will not be agreeable to those who receive with (sometimes exasperated) indignation any suggestion that Herodotus knowingly said untrue things in the Histories. I hope, however, that what I have to say makes a coherent and convincing case, with a more persuasive explanation than has been offered by others,2 that false statements some scholars would condemn as mere lies make in their context in the Histories an effective and readily comprehensible contribution to Herodotus’ narrative aims, and that he would have seen them as harmless or, in our contemporary term, ‘victimless’ untruths.
The Histories contains a great deal of information about specific elements of Greek religion, from sacrificial practice to oracles delivered at Delphi, but questions about the general role of religion in the work and about Herodotus' own religious attitudes suggest themselves to every reader and are the natural focus of a brief account. What distinguishes Herodotus' treatment of religion from that of other writers? Is there an overarching religious theme in the Histories? Can we construct a Herodotean theology? Difficulty in answering these questions is caused by the contrast between Herodotus' largely uncritical handling of religious material and his few critical or sceptical statements of general import. Most scholars focus on the former and neglect or explain away the latter; others, notably Burkert, stress the scepticism without adequately reconciling it with the usual, uncritical treatment. I attempt such a reconciliation here, primarily on the basis of Herodotus' ambivalent attitude to custom and convention (nomos).