The Herodotus Encyclopedia. Группа авторов
for the Iliadic histōr as a JUDGE who was not necessarily a witness). Finally, the autopsy issue is open to different interpretations that take into account the diverse layers of enunciation in the text (Darbo‐Peschanski 1987, 2007; Marincola 1997; Shrimpton 1997) and structural narrative echoes from literary and narratological approaches (Marincola and Dewald 2006; Baragwanath 2008; Grethlein 2013). Thus, it is noticed that Herodotus does not have a monopoly on autopsy; many informers that he refers to claim such an experience. Moreover, the inquiries sometimes conducted by characters of his narrative have reflective effects on his own historiē, providing it both with a contrastive background and a foil. This is especially the case with the kings and TYRANTS who either go to see things themselves or resort to eyewitnesses and even to “eye‐spies” (κατάσκοποι, κατόπται) (3.17–25, 134; 5.12–13; 7.146–47, 183, 208; 8.21, 23: Bakker 2002, Demont 2009). Therefore, autopsy not only contains many degrees in tradition, but also entangles many textual levels of the Histories.
Secondly, autopsy is not assumed to directly lead to TRUTH. Even if an informer has personally attended the spectacle at issue or seen such‐and‐such aspect of it—even if this informer is Herodotus himself—his testimony does not prevail. It is rather added as one opinion among others (visual or not) so that, at the end of the collection, the readers/listeners may form their own judgment in the silence of the text (Darbo‐Peschanski 1987, 2007; Bakker 2002). An example can be found in the inquiry into how far Egyptian territory stretches and especially about the DELTA (2.10–19). There, Herodotus portrays himself as an eyewitness, but he also debates with other IONIANS, only saying: “if our opinion is right …” (2.16). Furthermore, a visual experience may be variously interpreted, as Herodotus suggests about the account of the scribe at SAIS (2.28). Generally, the testimony of many informers, even though they are not actually proved to have been eyewitnesses, is worth more than that of an isolated one, even if it comes from a supposed eyewitness.
Thus, when studying autopsy in Herodotus’ inquiries, one cannot avoid asking the wider anthropological and historical questions of what experience means for a Greek in the fifth century BCE and what kind of truth it aims at. A situation where the voice of a group prevails over that of an individual, and where truth comes from consensus rather than an experimental control, must be pictured with very peculiar colors.
SEE ALSO: Evidence; Historical Method; Narratology; Orality and Literacy; Proof; Sources for Herodotus
REFERENCES
1 Bakker, Egbert J. 2002. “The Making of History: Herodotus’ Historiês Apodexis.” In Brill’s Companion to Herodotus, edited by Egbert J. Bakker, Irene J. F. de Jong, and Hans van Wees, 1–32. Leiden: Brill.
2 Baragwanath, Emily. 2008. Motivation and Narrative in Herodotus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3 Benveniste, Émile. 1948. Noms d’agent et noms d’action en indo‐européen. Paris: Adrien‐Maisonneuve.
4 Darbo‐Peschanski, Catherine. 1987. Le discours du particulier. Essai sur l’enquête hérodotéenne. Paris: Le Seuil.
5 Darbo‐Peschanski, Catherine. 2007. L’historia. Commencements grecs. Paris: Gallimard. (English translation of Chapter 4 by Jay Kardan, revised by the author, printed as “Herodotus and Historia” in ORCS Vol. 2, 78–106.)
6 Demont, Paul. 2009. “Figures of Inquiry in Herodotus’ Inquiries.”Mnemosyne ser. 4 vol. 62. 2: 179–205.
7 Dewald, Carolyn, and John Marincola, eds. 2006. The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8 Drews, Robert. 1973. The Greek Accounts of Eastern History. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies.
9 Floyd, Edwin D. 1990. “The Source of Greek ἵστωρ ‘Judge, Witness.’” Glotta 68: 157–66.
10 Grethlein, Jonas. 2013. Experience and Teleology in Ancient Historiography: Futures Past from Herodotus to Augustine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11 Jacoby, Felix. 1913. “Herodotos.” RE Suppl. 2, 205–520. Reprinted in Griechische Historiker, 7–154. Stuttgart: Druckenmüller, 1956.
12 Marincola, John. 1997. Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13 Nenci, Giuseppe. 1955. “Il motivo dell’autopsia nella storiografia greca.” SCO 3: 14–46.
14 Sauge, André. 1992. De l’épopée à l’histoire. Fondements de la notion d’historié. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
15 Schepens, Guido. 1980. L’autopsie dans la méthode des historiens grecs du Ve siècle av. J.C. Brussels: Paleis der Academiën.
16 Schepens, Guido. 2007. “History and Historia: Inquiry in the Greek Historians.” In A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography, edited by John Marincola. Vol. 1, 39–55. Malden, MA: Wiley‐Blackwell.
17 Shrimpton, Gordon S. 1997. History and Memory in Ancient Greece. With an Appendix on Herodotus’ Source Citations by G. S. Shrimpton and K. M. Gillis. Montreal: McGill‐Queen’s University Press.
18 Snell, Bruno. 1924. “Die Ausdrücke für den Begriff des Wissens in der vorplatonischen Philosophie.” Philologische Untersuchungen 29: 59–72.
19 Thomas, Rosalind. 1992. Literacy and Orality in Ancient Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20 Thomas, Rosalind. 2000. Herodotus in Context: Ethnography, Science and the Art of Persuasion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
AUXESIA, see DAMIA AND AUXESIA
AXIUS RIVER (ὁ Ἄξιος ποταμός)
MELODY WAUKE
University of Notre Dame
The largest river in MACEDONIA, modern Vardar (BA 50 C3; Müller I, 162). Herodotus describes the Axius as forming the border between the regions of MYGDONIA and BOTTIAEA (7.123.3; also Thuc. 2.99.4). Herodotus notes that, after the Persian fleet sailed around Chalcidice (480 BCE), they waited for XERXES and the army at THERME and nearby CITIES along the Axius (7.124). According to STRABO (7 F7a Radt), the PAEONIANS lived in the region Amphaxitis, so called because it was around (amphi‐) the Axius.
SEE ALSO: Echeidorus River; Rivers; Thermaic Gulf
FURTHER READING
1 Hammond, N. G. L. 1972. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, Historical Geography and Prehistory, 140–79. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
AXUS, see OAXUS
AZANES (Ἀζάνης, ὁ)
CHRISTOPHER BARON
University of Notre Dame
In his CATALOGUE of XERXES’ invasion force of 480 BCE, Herodotus names Azanes, son of ARTAEUS, as commander of the SOGDIANS (7.66.2). Nothing more is known of him.
SEE ALSO: Persia
FURTHER READING
1 Schmitt, Rüdiger. 2007. “Zu einigen Perser‐Namen bei Herodot.” BN 42: 381–405.
AZANIA (Ἁζανία, ἡ)
ALISON LANSKI
University of Notre Dame
The northern region of ARCADIA, near the border with Achaea (BA 58 C2). Azania is named for Azan, son of Arcas, according to MYTH (Paus. 8.4.2), though ETYMOLOGY suggests it may refer to the dry, hard land (Hilton 1992, 152–53). Boasting seventeen CITIES, Azania was one of three regions in Arcadia (Steph. Byz. s.v. Ἀζανία (Α 71)). Herodotus mentions it (6.127.3) as the ethnic designation