Reginald Walter Macan, Herodotus, The Seventh, Eighth, & Ninth Books with Introduction and Commentary

---

---

Ἑρμότιμον: the name is doubtless formed in honour of the god Hermes (not the river Hermos), and is borne by several historical pcrsons (Aspasia's father, Plutareh, Per. 24, a philosopher of Klazomenai, prior to Anaxagoras, Aristot. Metaph. 1. 3, 984 B, to say nothing of the later Stoic, who gives his name to a Dialogue of Lucian's). γένος, ‘by birth’ a man of Pedasa (infra) alias Pedasos, or Pedason, 5. 121— ‘second to none’ of the ‘chamberlains’ at the court (or ‘in the king's eyes’). φέρεσθαι τὰ δεύτερα, a metaphor from the race-course, Iliad 23. 537 ff.

---

εὐνοῦχοι, 7. 187 supra, is a strictly Hellenic term for a thoroughly unHellenic institution, at least in the classic period = οἱ τἡν εὐνὴν ἔχοντες. From the miserable fate of these confidential slaves emasculation was indissolubly associated with the word, and so eompletely domineered the merely etymological meaning that Aristotle (no humorist) applies the term to fruits without seed (cp. L. & S. sub voc.). Rawlinson's idea that Hermotimos exhibits the first historical instance of the great position of the Chamberlains, and that the influence of the Seraglio first made itself felt in the reign of Xerxes, is not merely contrary to the evidence of Ktesias, Pers. 5, 9, 11, 20 (ed. Gilmore, §§ 36, 40, 42, 51, etc.), but in itself improbable. Hdt. himself mentions τῶν εὐνούχων τοὺς πιστοτάτους at the court of Astyages 1. 117, and of Amasis 2. 4, and the large harems of the oriental kings will have employed these unfortunates in still earlier ages. Xenoph. Kyrop. 7. 5 (of course) ascribes the institution to Kyros.

οἱ δὲ Πηδασέες — ἐγένετο. This passage occurs, or recurs, almost totidem verbis in 1. 175. Are both passages genuine? If not, which of the two is genuine? Or are both spurious? Rawlinson accepts them both, seeing no more difficulty in such a dittograph by author than by copyist. Valckenaer first challenged this passage and regarded the genuine text as having run παρὰ βασιλέι. τῷ μεγίστη τίσις κτλ. Stem adopts and develops his arguments: (1) The notice suits the context better in Book 1 (where Hdt. is recording the resistance offered to Harpagos by the Pedasians). (2) Strabo 611, in citing, cites from Bk. 1, not from this passage. (3) The phraseology is not thoroughly Herodotean, and betrays (Stem adds) by incorrect turns the amateur of the Hadrianic age: thus (a) for αὐτοῖσι τε καὶ τοῖσι περιοίκοισι the interpolator here has τοῖσι άμφικτυόσι—leaving out αὐτοῖσί; (b) πᾶσι is an addition, and an exaggeration; (c) the preposition is incorrectly used, with genitive, of place, probably suggested by the falsified άμφικτυόσι; (d） ἐντὸς χρόνου is de trop (perhaps suggested by ἑκὰς χρόνου c. 144 infra, Stein); (e) χαλεπόν is the forger's variant for the Herodotean ἀνεπιτήδειον; (f) so too φύει for ἴσχει; (g) συμφέρεται is also hardly in order. These arguments are cogent. (h) The most remarkable difference between the two passages is that the miracle has happened δίς here, in Bk. 8, as against τρίς there in Bk. 1. That is regarded as an oversight: a curious one. Had the interpolator held the opinion that the 8th Bk., or the story of the Persian war, had been composed by Hdt. previously to the composition of the rest of the work, or of Bk. 1, he could not have forged a better bit of evidence! Moreover, he has inserted this note on the Pedasians here (by that theory at the earliest possible chance) rather than in Bk. 5. 121, or Bk. 6. 20, in either of which contexts the note would be more consonant with the context. It is impossible to maintain the authenticity of this passage in view of the objections; the other, on the testimony of Strabo, is genuine. This verdict sacrifices on the altar of truth a telling argument in favour of the priority of these Books. Fortunately, enough remains to prove it. Cp. Introduction, §§ 7, 8.