Artemisia in Herodotus

Author(s): Rosaria Vignolo Munson

Source: Classical Antiquity, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Apr., 1988), pp. 91-106
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25010881
Accessed: 20-10-2017 16:10 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25010881?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Classical Antiquity

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 ROSARIA VIGNOLO MUNSON

Artemisia in Herodotus

ARTEMISIA, queen of Herodotus' native Halicarnassus and ally of Xerxes in

the expedition against Greece, belongs to the restricted category of those phe
nomena in the Histories explicitly qualified as th6mata:1

Of the officers I shall make no mention, because no need is laid on me,

but I shall mention Artemisia at whom I especially marvel [Tig
d OA a loT a O ta LEIoeDct], who being a woman went to war against
Greece. After the death of her husband she herself held the royal
power, and although she had a grown up son, she took part in the
expedition on account of her daring and manly courage [av6gQqirg],
and not under any compulsion.
(7.99.1)
This passage opens a rather lengthy chapter devoted to Artemisia (7.99.1-3) in
the Catalogue of the Persian Forces, where Herodotus just names non-Persian
commanders and generals, as well as several "most famous" Persian individuals
embarked on the ships (7.98), but otherwise declines to mention the native
leaders of the foreign divisions of both fleet and army (7.96). The formulaic
transition found at 7.99.1, which singles out for discussion one item from a whole
class, occurs again in the account of Salamis, where Herodotus states that he is
not able to tell exactly how individual Greeks and Barbarians behaved during the

1. The term often serves to draw attention to the special significance of a fact about to be
discussed. See R. V. Munson, "The Celebratory Purpose of Herodotus: The Story of Arion in the
Histories," Ramus 15, no. 2 (1986) 93-104; H. Barth, "Zur Bewertung und Auswahl des Stoffe durch
Herodot (Die Begriffe th6ma, thomaz6, th6masios und th6mastos)," Klio 50 (1968) 93-110.

? 1988 BY THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 92 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

battle, but he will mention Artemisia (8.87.1).2 Artemisia represents a remark

able exception in the historian's selectivity: she contributes to the expedition
only 5 ships out of 1,207 in Xerxes' fleet (7.89.1, 99.2), and yet, on the whole,
she receives more coverage in the narrative of that expedition than any other
individual fighting on the Persian side, after Mardonius.
Herodotus must have felt especially inclined to relate interesting informa
tion about Halicarnassus and was perhaps even proud of his countrywoman's
exploits.3 But to assume that these motives, external as they are to the historical
circumstances which Herodotus is describing, fully explain the prominence he
gives to Artemisia is equivalent to denying in advance that she plays an integral
role in the context and that Herodotus is here fully in control of his material.
One should rather ask how much and in which way Artemisia contributes to
Herodotus' account of Xerxes' expedition against Greece, and in particular why
the author allows her to dominate his carefully balanced narrative of the crucial
battle of Salamis. In the attempt to answer these questions, I will examine the
individual appearances of Artemisia in the Histories. But first I will start to show
how the conspicuous feature of her feminine gender and masculine role, which in
all likelihood sparked Herodotus' interest in this extraordinary character,4 al
ready relates her to the history of the war between Greeks and Barbarians.

THE WOMAN-MAN

The word andreie, paradoxically applied to Artemisia in the introduction

(7.99.1),5 coupled with Xerxes' comment in reference to her action at Salamis
that "his men have become women and the women men" (8.88.3), indicates that
Artemisia somehow partakes of the Greek-Barbarian antithesis cast in the terms
of a contrast between male and female.6 Artemisia herself in her speech to
Xerxes before Salamis declares that "the Barbarians are inferior to the Greeks
on the sea as women are to men" (8.68.cl). Used figuratively, male and female
are somewhat shifting and undefined terms, whose range of connotations will
become clearer at the end of this paper. As opposed to the Greeks, the Barbari

2. For analogous formulae of selection, cf., e.g., 1.29.1, 82.1, 184, and see Henry Wood, The
Histories of Herodotus: An Analysis of the Formal Structure (The Hague 1972) 14.
3. F. Jacoby, "Herodotus," in RE Suppl 2 (Stuttgart 1913) 205-520, esp. 216.
4. See A. Tourraix, "La Femme et le pouvoir chez Herodote," DHA 2 (1976) 369-86, for the
importance of women in Herodotus' narrative.
5. In a unique instance. The adjective andreios occurs six times, and in three cases a contrast
with women is expressed or implied: J. E. Powell, A Lexicon to Herodotus (Cambridge, England
1936), s.v.
6. Cf. 7.57.2, 210.2, 9.20, 107.1. Opposites in early Greek thought are discussed by G. E. R.
Lloyd, Polarity and Analogy: Two Types of Argumentation in Early Greek Thought (Cambridge,
England 1966), esp. 94-102. For Herodotus' treatment of opposites, see M. Rosellini and S. Said,
"Usages de femmes et autres nomoi chez les "sauvages" d'Herodote: Essai de lecture structurale,"
ASNP 3, no. 8.3 (1978) 949-1005; D. Lateiner, "Polarita: II principio della differenza comple
mentare," QS 22 (1985) 79-193; J. Redfield, "Herodotus the Tourist," CP 80 (1985) 97-118.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 93

ans are not manly because they prove inadequate in the

the utterances of both Artemisia and Xerxes convey. I
are, in Herodotus and other Greek authors, femal
sense: their culture appears on the whole characterize
tures which the Greeks regarded as female-softne
ferocity, and excess-as well as by the dangerous predo
Artemisia, the woman whom Herodotus calls mascu
and antithetical to the Persians, and this ambiguity a
opposite side, the Greeks. As an Asiatic female invade
Xerxes and even caretaker of his children-a female fu
cantly, with a ferocious emasculated "slave"8-she iden
ans. She appears from the Greek point of view as the e
l'envers," where the women are "men" and the men ar
a world threatening to overcome Greece, the place of n
Aristophanes in fact equates Artemisia with the Ama
Herodotus the report that the Athenian generals, outr
appear in arms against Greece, put up a special reward
reflects this contemporary view.10
On the whole, however, an opposite and apparently
Artemisia, her Hellenic and "male" side, predominates
Unlike most other ruling queens of the Histories," Ar
and the ruler and commander of Greeks.'2 Her charac
facts. If Herodotus knew about her any gossip of fema

7. F. I. Zeitlin, "The Dynamics of Misogyny: Myth and Myth

Women in the Ancient World: The Arethusa Papers, ed. John Perad
N.Y. 1984) 159-94, esp. 163-64; Helen Sancisi Weerdenburg, "Exi
Greek Historiography on Persia," Images of Women in Antiquity
(Detroit 1983) 20-33.
8. At 8.103-6; Hermotimus is the author of "the greatest reven
9. I have borrowed the expression from R. Weil, "Artemise, ou
Plassart (Paris 1976) 215-24. For the idea of the Persian king's subj
00-00 and n.18. A society made up of effeminate and enslaved men
with respect to the world of the Greek polis, exclusive of both
Naquet, "Slavery and the Rule of Women in Tradition, Myth and U
Society, ed. R. C. Gordon (Cambridge, England 1981) 187-200, esp.
10. The Amazons are often mentioned in fifth-century orato
invading Greece. See W. B. Tyrrell, Amazons: A Study in Athenian
13-19, 62-63, and Hdt. 9.27.4.
11. I.e., the Massagetan Tomyris (1.205 ff.); the Babylonian S
ff.); Nitocris of Egypt (2.100); and Pheretime of Cyrene, who is Gre
12. At 7.99.2-3. Jacoby, RE Suppl. 2, 211; W. W. How and J
Herodotus (Oxford 1928) ad loc. Herodotus somewhat implausibly s
other cities under Artemisia's command all had an entirely Doric p
colonized by Dorians. Of Artemisia he says that her mother was Cr
sian." Although Lygdamis may have been Carian in the proper sens
[Oxford 1982] 10 n.49), in the light of what Herodotus says about H
regarded him of Greek descent, and not of the race he discusses at 1.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 94 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

bloody revenge such as we find in some later accounts of Artemisia,13 or such as

Herodotus himself goes out of his way to report concerning her indirect associ
ate, the eunuch Hermotimus, he mentions nothing of the sort and keeps her
remarkably free of those barbaric traits which in the Histories tend to character
ize the dominant females of the East.14 Foreign to bedroom politics and to
feminine issues,15 the Herodotean Artemisia belongs to the "outdoors," and by
virtue of her skill both in public council and in war she appears, not merely
masculine like a wild Amazon, but the representative of a straight male world,
like a cultured Athena. More important, for all that history assigns her to the
Persian side, Artemisia presides over the failure of Xerxes at Salamis,16 and all
the features that distinguish her from the rest of the Persian force and from
Xerxes himself make her, with respect to the victors, not "other" but "same." I
shall focus on this aspect of her character, showing in particular how in Herodo
tus' narrative, although Artemisia does eventually become identified with a
topsy-turvy world, threatening to Hellas, that world resembles Athens more
than it does Persia.
The passages that need to be examined in relation to their surroundings and
to other parts of the account of Xerxes' expedition against Greece are the follow
ing: (1) Herodotus' introduction of Artemisia (7.99), partially quoted above; (2)
the Persian Council scene before Salamis, with Artemisia's advice (8.67-69); (3)
the story of Artemisia's action at Salamis (8.87-88); and (4) the report of her
advice to Xerxes after the battle (8.102-3). Passage 4 is complementary to 2 and
will be treated in conjunction with it. In passage 3 Artemisia's character and
significance become fully defined.

THE INTRODUCTION OF ARTEMISIA

In the introductory chapter Artemisia is represented as antithetical to the

Barbarians by virtue of a peculiarity which in itself makes her worthy of mention
to the exclusion of other members of her class. The reason why Herodotus had
not considered it necessary to name the national leaders in Xerxes' army is that
they followed the expedition without authority, as mere slaves, just like any
other soldiers (7.96.1-2). In direct contrast to this passage, the historian intro

13. According to Ptolemy Hephaestion (Photius 190, 153a), Artemisia blinded in his sleep a
man who had spurned her love, and then jumped off the rock of Leucas. In Polyaenus 8.53.4, she
captures a town by feminine wiles: she hides her army and appears in a nearby grove of the Great
Mother with eunuchs, flute and cymbal players, thereby taking by surprise the citizens who have
come out to admire her.
14. Cf. the ferocity of Candaules' wife (1.8-12), Tomyris (1.214.4-5), Pheretime (4.202, 205),
Amestris (9.112), and the Egyptian Nitocris (2.100.2-3).
15. Unlike Atossa (3.31, 68.5, 88.1, 133-34, 7.2-3) and Phaidymie (3.68), among others.
16. C. Dewald, "Women and Culture in Herodotus' Histories," Women's Studies 8, no. 1/2
(1981) 93-127, esp. 111. The motif of women as foils for men's weaknesses is introduced in the
Histories with the Candaules-Gyges episode (1.8-13). See also Tomyris (1.205-14), the Babylonian
Nitocris (1.187), and the Spartan Gorgo (5.51).

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 95

duces Artemisia by saying that "she served on acco

courage, and not under any compulsion (oi6e&tfi;g ol Fo
Autonomy with regard to political choices is gener
Greek side, and especially of the Athenians,17, not
small resources and voluntary bravery Artemisia is f
huge force where even the leaders are slaves and all a
Freedom in an ally of Xerxes and manly courage in
which set Artemisia aside as a special case-a thoma
to both sides in the war at the same time. Equally su
made shortly below (99.3) that her five ships were "mo
the Phoenician contingent (the largest and best in Xer
the same sentence Herodotus adds that Artemisia also
best opinions ( &QLxcta Yv6)twa). The Carian queen is h
rank of contenders, and her value to the Persian enter
that recalls those among the Greeks who in the presen
same marks of excellence: an oustanding contribution
egy. Already in the introductory chapter Artemisia's affi
is beginning to take the form of a resemblance to the Ath

ARTEMISIA AS ADVISER

Artemisia's "excellent opinions" are exemplified in

the narrative, during the Persian Council before Sa
again in the report of her advice to Xerxes before th
first occasion Artemisia maintains that Xerxes should
the superior Greeks; the latter will soon scatter each
Persians move directly to the Peloponnese. A naval en
ous for Xerxes, however, since his allies are but cowa
of an excellent master (8.68.a-y). In her second advisor
suggests that Xerxes, who has been defeated at Salami
his own safety by returning to Asia, although he ma
with chosen land forces (as Mardonius himself had in
us and the Persians are all Xerxes' slaves anyway, m
success or scapegoats for an eventual defeat (8.102).
17. Some Greek states chose neutrality or Medism (7.132, 148-5
"wished to be free" (7.178.2). For Greek choices see also 7.136.1, 22
49, 56, 70. Athenian political autonomy is underlined throughou
(aiQETWdTEQa), 8.62, 140-44, 9.4-6. The speech of Themistocles to t
verges on the theme of choice: H. Kleinknecht, "Herodot und A
odot: Eine Auswahl aus der neueren Forschung, ed. Walter Mar
(supra n.2) 166-67, 179. Earlier in the Histories, Athenian freedo
(4.137,cf. 142).
18. Forced participation in war (anank-): 7.108.1, 110, 172, 103.4
Book 7, see 39.1 (Pythius), 135.3 (Hydarnes), 233 (Thebans), and th
lashing (22.1, 35.1, 56, 103.4, 223.3). For slavery at 8.68 and 102, see

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
96 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

The two speeches are examples of wise advice, one disregarded and the
other followed, according to a pattern frequent in the Histories.19 The character
ization of Artemisia as an adviser is consistent. On both occasions her flattery of
the king and her expressed acknowledgment of the master-slave relationship
between Xerxes and his subjects befits a Persian ally. What is important, how
ever, is the difference in format between the two scenes and the special circum
stances of Artemisia's first advisory intervention. After Salamis, Xerxes consults
Artemisia in private, having dismissed all the other counsellors (8.101.2). This
setting dramatizes in a direct way the permanently operative fact of the king's
absolute arbitrium and of his unaccountability vis-a-vis subjects, allies, and advis
ers. Artemisia's previous speech, by contrast, is inserted in the more ambiguous
frame of a group deliberation, since on the question of whether or not to fight at
Salamis, Xerxes wishes to hear the opinion of the majority of his allied command
ers (8.67.1) and then actually chooses to abide by that opinion (69.2).
Thus, a democratic element exceptionally intrudes in a Persian council,20
underlining by contrast its other more predictable autocratic features: courtly
formalities (67.2, 68.1), the speakers' address to Xerxes as master (68.al) and,
most important, a final result (the decision to engage the enemy in a naval battle)
which corresponds to the king's own preference, according to the royal nomos of
aggression.2s On the one hand, the substance of Artemisia's speech helps to
explain why the strategy that was adopted failed, as in other cases of wise advice
rejected (e.g., 1.71). On the other hand, the narrative frame represents the
deliberative process as a failed test of democratic behavior, in order to explain
why an unsound strategy was adopted in the first place. Since the vote of the
allied commanders, all of whom expect that punishment will strike the single
nonconformist speaker (69.1), clearly proceeds from fear of displeasing the king
rather than from strategic considerations, the voting procedure reveals how
despotism impairs the capacity of individuals to participate in public matters.
The ultimate responsibility for the wrong decision falls implicitly on Xerxes, who
is the master and can in any case do as he wishes, majority or no (see 8.103). But
Herodotus here emphasizes, rather, the endemic slavishness of his subjects who,
for once, have been called upon to deliberate.
In these circumstances, Artemisia appears as disengaged from the barbarian
context as the introductory chapter already implied. While in both her advisory
interventions she recognizes the reality of an autocratic environment and assumes
it as the basis of her arguments (see supra, p. 00), in the Persian Council her very
role as wise adviser depends on her not being subject to the overbearing pressures

19. Richmond Lattimore, "The Wise Advisor in Herodotus," CP 24 (1939) 24-35.

20. The Constitutional Debate (3.80-83) is the only other Persian council recorded by Herodo
tus that is based on majority voting, and it occurs during an interregnum.
21. The Persian nomos of aggression, which inevitably compels Xerxes (7.8, 12-18), also
produces a marked preference for immediate attack in the case of individual battles. See Mardonius
at Plataea, 9.41. J. A. S. Evans, "Despotes Nomos," Athenaeum 43 (1965) 142-53.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 97

that the Persian system imposes upon the other de

royal tradition and fear for personal safety. Artemisia is h
unique ally identified earlier (7.99.1), who stands outs
master-slave norm and does her best to contribute to a
is a voluntary partner: just as she has proven to be "not
xcxioxTj yEvo?Lvq... oiTE EXladoa ato6?E&ait v. 8.
the xaxoi 6boOot (8.68.y)-so now she gives what she th
advice (xa TvyXavwo cpgoveovoa aQLota, 68.al).
Since the freedom from compulsion attributed to A
tory chapter manifests itself in the Persian Council a
advisory intervention is equivalent to an isolated disp
would call isegorie. This is the essential principle of p
Athens: it results in the people's best efforts on beha
first mentions it in order to explain why the Atheni
fighters after the fall of tyranny (5.78).22 Later he descri
in Athens in the face of Xerxes' imminent invasion (7.
two separate occasions, Themistocles, a private individ
tial than Artemisia in the Persian context, (at least acc
vECaoT at 7.143.1), contributed his excellent opinio
QLTQi?oe) to a community of men like himself, who
without regard for official authorities (see 1.142) or t
sonal advantage (144.1). The Persian Council scene,
despotism as the cause of a wrong decision and theref
recalls the earlier passage which shows how on the oth
in the opposite way, taking the first strategic steps to
battle.
At the same time, the Persian Council scene falls between two sections of
Greek deliberations just before Salamis,23 to which it is related by a different set
of analogies and contrasts. The parallel between Artemisia on the one hand and
Themistocles/Athens on the other is in this case made immediately obvious by
the simple fact that Artemisia advises the Persians on the very same issue on

22. The term isegorie, which refers to the right of anyone who wishes to do so to speak (not
merely vote) in the Assembly, here designates, rightly or wrongly, the Cleisthenic democracy. G. T.
Griffith, "Isegoria in the Assembly at Athens," Ancient Society and Institutions: Studies Presented to
Victor Ehrenberg on His 75th birthday (Oxford 1966) 115-38.
23. Herodotus seems to record three distinct Greek councils at Salamis (8.49-56, 56-63, 74
83), but because of interruptions in the narrative 8.56-63 and 74-83 form parallel units, before and
after the Persian Council.
24. In Artemisia's speech, oqpeag bLaoxeSbg xaxa t6XkLg b6e exaoTol (peviovTra recalls the
words of Mnesiphilus to Themistocles (57.2, xatd ... Jt6olkg exacTOL T xQelovtal; bLaToxYbtaootvaL
T1iV oaTacLrTv), while ov6e owpL EXiOEl TQo6 TCv 'A0Nvcov vavCtIaXZ ev, later confirmed in the
author's voice at 8.70.2 (cf. 74.2), is countered by Themistocles at 8.60.a, 6oiLos atrxoi e Tevcov
tQovavacRaXjoEtg InekXoovvio oov xact JiQog T( 'Io0uq. Themistocles' speech is not otherwise the
counterpart of Artemisia's, because it avoids mentioning weaknesses on either side and concentrates
on what is in the best interests of the different groups of Greeks.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 98 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

which Themistocles, as the representative of Athens, advises the Greeks- that

is, whether to fight a naval battle at Salamis or proceed/withdraw to the Isthmus.
The strategies which the two advisers prescribe are mutual opposites,24 both
conducive to success and both unpopular with the majority (8.67.2; 8.57, 74).
Another important similarity relates the Greek deliberations to the Persian
Council as a whole. In the latter the democratic voting procedure is shown to be
incompatible with the Persian system. In each of the two sections of Greek
deliberations democracy appears impossible among the Hellenes. These, unlike
Xerxes' allies, exercise their right to vote as free men, but Themistocles uses
military force to reverse their decision: first he threatens to withdraw the indis
pensable Athenian ships (8.62.2), and later he even summons the enemy fleet to
blockade the Greeks at Salamis (8.75-82). The Athenian general is the executive
rather than the adviser on this occasion. Besides playing the role equivalent to
that of Artemisia in the Persian Council, he assumes a sort of power that among
the Persian allies only Xerxes could have exercised in case of disagreement with
the majority.
The significance of this breakdown in the democratic process in the Greek
deliberations will be considered below (p. 101). What is important for the mo
ment is that it creates a mutual difference between the circumstances under
which Themistocles/Athens and Artemisia respectively operate. Just as Themi
stocles managed to influence public policy at Athens (7.142-43), so now through
his agency Athens is able to exercise control over the policy of all the Greeks,
and to safeguard her own interests while contributing to the common cause. The
most farsighted strategist of the opposite side, by contrast, remains isolated and
powerless. It is precisely Artemisia's failure at the stage of deliberations that
determines her extraordinary action in the midst of a defeat she had tried to
prevent.

ARTEMISIA AT SALAMIS

Herodotus reports that, in the general confusion of the Persian fleet at

Salamis, in order to escape from the attack of an Athenian trireme Artemisia
thought of doing the following, which in fact turned out to her advantage (T6 xcai
oUvvveIxE 3ToLTqodorl): she rammed an allied ship (vqYi (pin) from Calynda,
which carried the king of Calynda himself, Damasithymus (8.87.2). The histo
rian declares that he is unable to say if there had been a previous quarrel "at the
Hellespont" between Artemisia and Damasithymus, or if she had premeditated
this action (against him for some other reason), or if the Calyndian ship just
happened to be there by chance (xnact TirUv, 87.3). At any rate, by ramming
and sinking it Artemisia was lucky enough to obtain a double advantage
(e?ixv(Tn XQoaaLivrl bIZnka &ni>Iv% ayafa eQyaoato). In the first place, the
Athenian captain desisted from his pursuit, thinking that Artemisia was fighting
on the Greek side (87.4), and consequently she was successful in saving her life

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 99

(TOLoiTOV aciT V orvVlxe yEVeaLoO blaqpvye?v TE xca

besides that, she derived from a bad action the ad
(xaxo6v EQyaoaitlEVv... evb6ox[iroal) in Xerxes' eyes,
ing from afar, thought that Artemisia had sunk an e
misia was also fortunate (acvTi ovvlvex? eg EUT/XvXir
Calyndian crew survived to accuse her. Xerxes' alle
thought he saw was to exclaim that his men had becom
men (88.3).
This report, singled out from among deeds of
(8.87.1), somewhat surprisingly constitutes the centra
sode in the account of what Herodotus regards as t
Persian Wars and an Athenian victory (see 7.139). I
ances, as we have seen, Artemisia emerged as posses
that make her similar to the Athenians: an important role
war, political freedom, freedom from old conventions,
will now argue that the prominence of Artemisia in th
Salamis can be explained in the light of a continuing an
acter and Athens, and that the story of her action mak
ning of a new era of Athenian hegemony in Greece.

THE MOTIVE OF SELF-INTEREST: ATHENS AND

In its most immediate import, the Artemisia episode de

self-serving action. Before examining that passage in
necessary to show how that action is not inconsistent
Histories as potential Athenian behavior in the newly
system.
Herodotus explicitly declares (5.78, cf. 66.1) and later demonstrates (7.143
44) that the citizens' right to have equal voice in the administration of public affairs
is an asset for the state as a whole (XQvlPca ojuov6aiov, 5.78). Nevertheless, Athe
nian isegorie, which motivates each citizen to work for the state in order to benefit
himself (cf. autog iexaTrog enov wuT nQofhEVET xarcTyaE4Eoal, 5.78), sanctions
as the individual's ultimate goal the pursuit of his own interests. This means that
on the one hand the people's ability to recognize where their interest truly lies (as
at 7.144) is likely to produce common efforts no less valiant, and often more
effective in practice, than the almost blind dedication to the community expected
of the Spartans;25 on the other hand, the public and private good are not regarded
as necessarily and invariably identical, nor does the sacrifice of the second to the

25. The "social" character of Spartan arete, as it is described at 7.104.2-3, is discussed by A.

Dihie, "Herodot und die Sophistik," Philologus 106 (1967) 206-20, esp. 208-10. Although individual
Spartans in the Histories occasionally go astray, total identification with the state and its values
remains the ideal (see, e.g., Pausanias at 9.79.2 and how the Spartans judge an individual brave for
personal reasons at 9.71.2-4).

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 100 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

first seem to be an essential part of the ethical foundation to the new Athenian
democracy as it is of the Spartan state.
Both patriotic energy and utilitarian individualism manifest themselves espe
cially in Themistocles, who in general embodies Athenian tendencies to an ex
treme degree.26 Themistocles in the Histories does everything in his power to
promote the success of his city; as he pursues that task, he also takes the opportu
nity to benefit himself separately but without direct damage to the state.27 In the
eventuality that public and private interests should at a certain point cease to be
mutually compatible, then he is ready to choose between the two, even resorting
to some degree of treason for the sake of self-preservation (8.109-10). What
Themistocles plans and prepares for after Salamis, a daring change of sides in
order to secure an escape for himself (&aoorQocp1, 109.5), is equivalent to what
Artemisia actually does during the battle.
Among individual Athenians, Themistocles is of course as exceptional in his
actions as he is in his position of leadership, but Herodotus' account of earlier
Athenian history shows that Themistocles' motives stem from the climate of
Athens, which is both ethically and politically flexible, according to what seems
most expedient.28 At the time of Xerxes' invasion, Themistocles' attitude toward
his own city is closely comparable to that of the polis Athens-that is, "the
Athenians" as a deliberating citizen body-toward the rest of the Hellenes.
Athens saved Greece (7.139.7), just as Themistocles was instrumental to the
survival of Athens. But just as Themistocles is only conditionally loyal to Ath
ens, so the city's Panhellenism, for all that it has an idealistic component,29 is also
variable in the measure to which it serves Athenian interests. Herodotus praises
the Athenians for yielding the command of the fleet to the Spartans on the eve of
the Persian invasion, thereby avoiding internal strife in the face of an external
threat; but he adds that later, when they no longer needed the Spartans as allies,
the Athenians were quick to take the leadership of the fleet away from them
(8.3).30 During the earlier stages of the war against the Persians, the cooperation
of the other Greek states was absolutely required by the goal that the Athenians
had set for themselves, a successful resistance (7.143.3, 145.1). Therefore Ath

26. This point has been convincingly argued by Henry Immerwahr, Form and Thought in
Herodotus (Cleveland 1966) 223-25; see also Wood (supra n.2) 185-86. It is necessarily connected
with the view that Herodotus' portrait of Themistocles is not as unfavorable as some critics still
regard it as being (e.g., recently, A. J. Podlecki, The Life of Themistocles [Montreal 1975] 68-72).
On this question, see H. Strasburger, "Herodot und das perikleische Athen," in Marg (supra n. 17)
574-608, esp. 603; C. W. Fornara, Herodotus: An Interpretative Essay (Oxford 1971) 66-74.
27. In Euboea (8.4-5) he takes money for what he must think is in the city's interest anyway
(unlike Eurybiades and Adeimantus, who also accept bribes). For Themistocles' pleonexie among
the islanders (8.111-12), see infra, n.33.
28. H. J. Diesner, "Der athenische Burger bei Herodot und Thukydides," Wiss. Z. Halle 6
(1957) 899-903, esp. 901; Immerwahr (supra n.26) 209-15.
29. Immerwahr (supra, n.26) 217-23. See infra, n.31.
30. I paraphrase according to the most common rendering of this passage. For a different
interpretation and related discussion, see Immerwahr (supra n.26) 220-21 and n.87.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 101

ens proved willing to do everything in her power to

Herodotus also shows, however, that in case she ha
Athens was ready to adapt her goals to circumstances r
ble damage either in the name of the Panhellenic
heroism, as the Spartans would have been likely to
individual Themistocles on his own behalf when he f
Athenians, so Athens herself, unsupported by the ot
ing an advantageous alliance with Xerxes in order to s
Athenian self-interest and pragmatism include the
fies the means; in particular, it even justifies, if need be,
against allies and other Greeks. Former allegiances an
factors when a specific goal must be achieved.32 If the
peace with Xerxes, they will also march in arms agai
Barbarians may lead them (9.11.2). Actual initiatives o
against individual Greek states start shortly after Sa
action by which Themistocles compelled the Greeks t
their will (see supra, p. 98) worked in favor of all, no
readiness it reveals to violate the autonomy of Greek s
the Greeks in view of a future, already predicted
interests and those of Athens will not be identical. In
the argument of Athenian national security that warr
Delian League from alliance to empire.34 The historia
narrative of past actions of how the Athenians dared
aggressive, making the best of difficult circumstance
does a great deal to explain the role of the saviors
which the other Greeks interpreted as a turnabout and

31. The Athenian speeches at 8.143 and 144, 9.7 and 11 should
ments. They constitute a series, which shows the breaking point,
Athenian Panhellenism, but of Athenian idealism in general (8.144
practical attitude starts in the centerpiece with an introduction of th
and the just (9.7.2). Fornara (supra n.26) has rightly emphasized the
effect of this group of passages.
32. See, e.g., Themistocles' cooperation with his enemy Aristi
tion of Athens with her rival Aegina (8.79-80, 83.2).
33. At 8.111-12. The Andros episode closely parallels the Ath
Marathon (6.132) and is the forerunner of Thucydides' Melian D
account of Greek deliberations before Salamis by Themistocles' int
Athenian fleet is strong enough to vanquish any of the Greek stat
n.26) 602; R. J. Lenardon, The Saga of Themistocles (London 1978)
34. See the Athenian ambassadors at Sparta in Thuc. 1.75.4-5,
"no one can blame those who in the greatest danger take care of th
speeches at least reflect contemporary arguments and therefore be
the Athenians gave account of themselves or were regarded by other
of the problem of Thucydides' speeches, see J. J. Wilson, "What D
Speeches?" Phoenix 36 (1982) 95-103.
35. See Thuc. 1.86.1. I am especially indebted to C. Fornara, "
Archidamian War," Hermes 106 (1981) 149-56, see esp. 155, for the

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 102 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

Artemisia at Salamis mirrors the tendencies of the Athenians as Herodotus

portrays them and conveys a prophetic vision of Athens beyond the chronologi
cal range of the Histories. Since she has by now failed in helping to achieve a
public goal, Artemisia has reached the point at which her interests no longer
coincide with those of others. She therefore dissociates herself from the common
good and thinks of her personal advantage, even at the cost of adding damage to
her own side. Her action is boldly unconventional and it includes betrayal and
aggression, in particular at the expense of an ally and a close neighbor with
whom she may or may not (Herodotus clearly devalues revenge in favor of self
interest as a motive, 8.87.3) have had a previous quarrel.

ARTEMISIA AT SALAMIS: THE VICTORY OF INTELLIGENCE

The Artemisia episode is related to the rest of the Salamis narrative by the
final words of Xerxes (88.3), which contrast Artemisia's behavior with the inade
quacy of the Persians in this battle, thereby equating her superiority with that of
the victorious Greeks. At Salamis, however, the contrast between Greeks and
Barbarians competes with evidence of their similarity. The preceding delibera
tion sections have already suggested that the Greeks, no less than the Persians,
fight under compulsion (cf. 8.69.2 and 80). During the battle, both sides are
internally disunited,36 but they are also brave to an equal degree.37
Thus, Xerxes' comment that "his men have become women," meant as a
complaint of the lack of valor of his force analogous to his perception of the
Persians at Thermopylae ("many human beings, few true men," 7.210.2), is not
borne out by the surrounding context in the same way as in that earlier case. In
the light of Herodotus' narrative, it is, rather, with respect to competence that
Xerxes, without realizing it, confirms what Artemisia had said about his force in
the Persian Council ("inferior to the Greeks on the sea as women are to men,"
8.68.al).38 From the point of view of intellectual achievement, then, Xerxes
ironically indicts himself above all: he has been the major cause of the Persian
defeat by proving inferior to a woman in strategy-gnom--and is now blind to
her gnome in action.

his narrative with events of his own time. That Herodotus was partially critical toward Periclean
Athens has been especially maintained by Strasburger (supra n.26), Fornara (supra n.26) 75-90, and
C. W. Forrest, "Herodotus and Athens," Phoenix 38 (1984) 1-11.
36. At one level, the Artemisia episode itself indicates Persian disunity, confirmed at 8.90. For
disunity among the Greeks, see 8.92 as well as the two reports of conflicting claims (8.84, 94.4),
which suggests quarrels in the aftermath of the battle.
37. "Great deeds" were performed by the Greeks (see esp. 8.91) and also by the Barbarians
(8.85, 90.3). Herodotus stresses that the Persians were braver than usual (8.86, 89.2). On the other
hand, 84.2 and 94 temper the representation of Greek valor, further minimizing the discrepancy
between the two sides.
38. The Barbarians do nothing with a plan (aorv v6o), drown in great numbers because they do
not knowing how to swim, and accidentally inflict damage upon each other (8.86, 89).

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 103

Xerxes' praise of Artemisia, "women become men,"

facts in a sense different than the misguided speaker
is emblematic of Xerxes' opponent's superiority in th
to that by which Themistocles crossed into the op
enemy fleet on behalf of the Greeks (8.75-76). The abi
master circumstances by means of the most effectiv
Artemisia "manly" vis-a-vis the Persians (cf. andreie
morally neutral trait and therefore entails a relative
traditional sense of straightforward valor based on a
Themistocles calls himself aristos kai sophotatos, "bes
Greeks (8.110.3), but his merit cannot be ranked in t
merit of those who were most eager to die fighting
Salamis he is awarded by the Spartans an extraordina
dexiotes but fails to obtain the standard prize of valor
the Athenians themselves at 8.93.1). In the case of A
intelligence and skill she displays even blatantly den
men-women reversal mentioned by Xerxes, which at f
Barbarian-Greek antithesis in the pattern of a polari
Spartans (as at 7.210.2), is measured against Artemisia
helps to assign it to its proper sphere, far removed fr
extremes. To this sphere of Athenian efficiency (as t
misia herself) the terms male and female can be alter
on whether it is Persia or the aspect of Hellenic cultu
that provides the point of reference.39

ATHENIAN SOPHIE AND ATHENIAN SOPH

Artemisia, whose aristai gnomai make her the equiv

his role of wise adviser, suddenly emerges at Salam
stocles the trickster. The success of her action depend
sides in the battle, her Athenian pursuers as well as Xe
88.2). In a similar way, Themistocles implemented his
deceiving both the enemy Xerxes and his Greek allies
Simulation and cunning are aspects of Athenian in
represents it throughout the Histories starting with S
more prominent with its last embodiment, Themis
occasions deceives several parties at the same time.41

39. Cf. the discussion of "hard" and "soft" cultures in Redfield

40. See the contrivances of Solon (1.29) and Pisistratus (1.60.3, 63
Themistocles as heir of Solon is discussed by G. Ferrara, "Temist
70. For deception as a sign of intelligence according to the Greeks,
l'intelligence: La Metis des Grecs (Paris 1974), esp. 18-31.
41. At 8.5: the Euboeans, Eurybiades and Adeimantus; 8.109.11

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 104 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

tion practiced by Themistocles is based on the contradictory data that reality

itself provides, and it consists in the exploitation of part of the truth or at least of
what Herodotus regards as the truth. In particular Themistocles' argument at
8.109 by which, according to Herodotus, he deceived the Athenians (6bk3aXXe,
8.110.1) interprets the current situation in a way which is in itself unobjection
able from the historian's viewpoint.42 That speech is nevertheless dishonest be
cause it is part of an antilogy (see 8.108.1) and a tool of persuasion bearing no
relation to the speaker's beliefs. Because of his ability to argue convincingly on
either side of an issue, Themistocles in the Histories appears as the forerunner of
the Sophists of Herodotus' own time,43 whose ambivalence encouraged people to
question all absolute assumptions and appeared to many (cf. Aristoph. Nub. 94
103) as strikingly akin to systematic deception.
Unlike the representation of Themistocles, the narrative of Artemisia at
Salamis emphasizes less the trickster's intention to deceive (ESboe of To66
o3toL]oaL, 8.87.2) than the confusing nature of an experience that has become
susceptible to manipulation (see 87.2, 06Q4pog). Here a friend becomes an
enemy, but perhaps already was an enemy in the guise of an ally (87.2-3); a
woman displays manly valor, but valor has the goal "escape and not die" (88.1)
in place of the canonical "conquer or die" (see 7.104.5); the weaker turns out to
be the stronger, from a bad thing comes a good thing (8.87.4, 88.1), and utter
disaster for some produces still greater prosperity for others (88.3). This accumu
lation of reversals44 mirrors a relativistic view of reality and recalls another
manifestation of that same intelligence which prevailed through strategy against
the Persians: the theoretical framework that later helped to justify the motives
and methods of Athenian leadership in Greece.45

THE ROLE OF TYCHE

The miniature of Artemisia at Salamis also contains the reference to another
contemporary debate, that on the respective influence of intelligence (gnome)
and chance (tyche) on human affairs.46 In the progressive atmosphere of Athens,

42. See infra, n.55.

43. See also Themistocles' speech before Salamis, summarized at 8.83. W. Schmid and 0.
Stahlin, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur, Part 1, Vol. 2 (Munich 1934) 575n.
44. Cf. the list in Weil (supra n.9) 220, who first took this passage as a conscious reference to
Athenian sophistics. However, Weil thought that the maintheme of this story was the reference to
discussions fashionable in Herodotus' time about the nature and status of women, which would be
inexplicable in this context. The men-women reversal is simply the most conspicuous of the series.
For other evidence in the Histories of Herodotus' contact with the Sophists, see Wolf Aly,
Volksmarchen, Sage und Novelle bei Herodot und seinen Zeitgenossen (Gottingen 1921/1969) 286
92; Schmid-Stahlin (supra n.43) 572-77; Dihle (supra n.25).
45. See Mario Untersteiner, ISofisti: Testimonianze eframmenti (Milan 1964), esp. chapter 18,
"Sofistica e realismo politico," vol. 2, 191-215.
46. See especially L. Edmunds, Chance and Intelligence in Thucydides (Cambridge, Mass.
1975); H. Herter, "Thukydides und Demokrit fiber Tyche," WS N.F. 10 (1976) 106-28.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 MUNSON: Artemisia in Herodotus 105

many intellectuals of Herodotus' time would maintain

given result ultimately depends on the greater or lesse
with which men act.47 In the Histories, this tendency to
in Themistocles' expressed trust in the connection be
(8.60.y). Herodotus himself, in spite of his more trad
about the degree of control that man can exercise over
even mentions good luck as he relates the successes of
more remarkable, therefore, that he should now emph
story whose major theme is the manifold achievement
reports an intelligent action analogous to Themistocles
tioned three times (see my summary above, pp. 98-99)
(87.3), the author's supposition that Damasithymus m
the role of victim "by chance" simply shows the casua
betrayal, as a means to a self-centered end. In the ot
EiTXr'Xq is made to account for Artemisia's success,
not the intended outcome of her action (survival), but
beyond any possible calculation (survival and good rep
The phrase bLnka aya6ta, reminiscent of Themisto
goals-a sign of his strategical flexibility and foresight
result, the excess of which can be explained only in irrati
Through the Artemisia episode, the moral questi
action, and the intellectual gnomeltyche issue come tog
Salamis in a way that perhaps suggests the author
history. Tyche in Herodotus often clearly indicates th
man does not comprehend by reason, as when an outco
as the logical consequence of a good or bad decisio

46. See especially L. Edmunds, Chance and Intelligence in Th

1975); H. Herter, "Thukydides und Demokrit fiber Tyche," WS N.F
47. This is not to deny the role of chance, but, rather, to emphasiz
intelligence, thus planning and techno are primary, and bad luck is o
See Pericles in Thucydides (especially 1.40.1, 2.62.5) and cf. Democri
(supra n.46) 1-6, 7-36, 70-75.
48. At 1.32.4, tdv eoaL adv@QOYog ovu(poQpi , "man is utterly a th
cannot presume that this corresponds exactly with Herodotus' view, b
example, seems designed to confirm its correctness.
49. Only at 7.144.1 the suggestion of lucky timing for the Naval B
by Herodotus' version, according to which an internal war ironical
from an external threat.
50. The insistence on chance is also reinforced by the occurren
(8.87.2, 88.1, 3).
51. See especially 8.5.3 and 22.3 (eu' awcp6TEgQa vowov).
52. The simple TixX and OETin xUjXT (1.126.6, 3.139.3, 4.8.3, 5.9
meaning.
53. In the words of Artabanus to Xerxes (7.1062), tyche may determine the failure of a good
deliberation or the success of bad ones; all the same, man must attach the greatest importance to
deliberating well. XvvxvXIT tends especially to be used to indicate a chance happening unrelated to
planning (1.68.1, 3.121.2, 5.41.1, 65.1, 9.91.1).

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 106 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 7/No. 1/April 1988

retribution for a moral or immoral action.54 Tyche, therefore, has no part in the
outcome of the Persian Wars, and particularly in the victory of Salamis (nor,
consequently, in the success of Themistocles' efforts). These were rational
events, and Herodotus believes both explanations which Themistocles provided,
with greater or lesser sincerity, on two separate occasions: intelligent delibera
tion brought about commensurate results, and the gods supported a just cause.55
But the end of the Persian Wars opens a new era, in which a spectacular success,
crowned by fame, was achieved by Athens at the expense of both her former and
her current allies. Herodotus' astonishment, in the course of the Salamis narra
tive, for a double achievement which exceeded planning as it defied morality,
seems to answer the contemporary claim voiced by Pericles in Thucydides that
the Athenians "not only repelled the Barbarian, but also (Te ... xai) made the
city what it is today by gnome, rather than by tyche. "56

Historically unimportant actions and secondary characters do not remain iso

lated curiosities in Herodotus. Even though analysis of them risks making us
forget that they provide only rapid hints within the context of a large and com
plex narrative, it serves nevertheless to confirm Herodotus' method: through
analogy, his thomata lend depth and clarity to the report of major events. Like
Artemisia, the woman-man who controverts all assumptions, daring and compe
tent in counsel and on the sea, so Athens, the city noncity,57 free from human
despots and from despotic restraints to deliberation, is both a wonder and a
threat to the "normal" world-the Hellenic world as it is defined by a common
tradition.58 It could well appear as if the triumph of her intelligence had come to
defy reason--aya&f TUiXn .59

University of Pennsylvania

54. The obstinate success of Polycrates (in whose story at 3.39-46, 120-25, tyche derivatives
occur thirteen times) is described as good fortune without a cause, just as his downfall is motivated
only generally by the necessary instability of tyche. In other cases, tyche accounts for an outcome
unexpected especially from an ethical viewpoint, a non-tisis. See 1.204.2, 6.16.2, 1.119.1.
55. Cf. 8.60.y and 109.3. The second statement occurs in a deceitful speech (110.1) but never
theless seems consistent with Herodotus' belief. See 8.65, 83.2, 94, for Herodotus' interest in alleged
evidence of divine intervention at Salamis.
56. Thuc. 1.144.4. The antithesis and combination of these and similar terms provided familiar
categories for assessing events. Cf. the Spartan exhortation to the Athenians after Pylos (Thuc.
4.18.3-4). In Herodotus, chance and intelligence are explicitly combined at 1.68.1.
57. At 8.61; cf. Thuc. 1.74.3, "a city that no longer existed." The ships became the city.
58. The old Hellenic tradition is expressed by Demaratus: "Poverty has always been endemic to
Greece, arete is an added virtue, achieved from sophie and strong nomos; by practicing it, Hellas
defends itself against poverty and tyranny" (7.102.1). The Spartan ethos represents an intensification
of common Greek values (102.3-4, 104.4-5), but Athens is bent on a course of financial prosperity
(Thuc. 2.13.3-6), daring well beyond defensive valor, innovation, and ethical complexity (see, e.g.,
Thuc. 1.68-71).
59. I am grateful to Professor A. J. Graham for reading all the various drafts of this paper and
discussing them with me. I also thank Professors W. Robert Connor, Carolyn Dewald, C. W.
Fornara, and Donald Lateiner, who also have read the article and have offered valuable suggestions
and criticism. The responsibility for all matters of fact and interpretation rests solely with me.

This content downloaded from 200.145.117.44 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 16:10:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms