HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE:

ITS HISTORICITY AND SIGNIFICANCE

HYUN JIN KIM

AbstractThe literary interpretation of Herodotus in classical scholarship has arguably abandoned the fixation with the historical veracity of Herodotus’ account that characterised earlier Hero-dotean scholarship. The critical analyses of Detlev Fehling and François Hartog on the historian’s Scythian logos (singled out for criticism) in different ways acted as catalysts for this development which heralded a generation of more sophisticated critique of the text as essentially a work of literature rather than history. Such an approach has had some positive results, especially in identifying the various levels of literary colouring that characterise the historian’s work. However, this article argues that the historical element simply cannot be removed from its former position of centrality in literary interpretation. It calls for a greater appreciation of the historicity of the Scythian logos by challenging the arguments through which Hartog and Fehling triggered the movement away from ‘history’ to ‘literature’. The article shows that a more intensive application of comparative, Central Asian historical and archaeological material in literary analysis, reveals that the logos as a whole is far more deeply immersed in the world of steppe nomadism than is often thought possible in classi-cal scholarship.

The Scythian logos of Herodotus with its strange and wondrous tales about the far north has attracted much attention and critique in recent Herodotean scholarship. In the plethora of scholarship on the logos the critical analyses of Fehling1 and Har-tog2 have been particularly influential or notorious. Fehling inherited a tradition of empirical, nearly positivistic textual analysis, which was focused primarily on prov-ing Herodotus right or wrong. Hartog’s famous work marked a movement away from this approach to a more sophisticated appreciation of the literary and artistic dimension of Herodotus. The historian’s work, through the lens of late 20th-cen-tury neo-historicism, was seen in the context of cultural history and was appreciated as literature, not just history. Moreover, quite remarkably, despite significant differ-ences in approach, both critics agreed that Herodotus’ account of the Scythians is

1 Fehling 1971; 1990.2 Hartog 1980; 1988.

doi: 10.2143/AWE.9.0.0000000 AWE 9 (2010) 115-135

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 11593510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 115 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

116 HYUN JIN KIM

3 Hinge 2003, 69.4 Most notably Thomas 2000, 28, 54, 60–63, 68. 5 Pritchett 1993.

largely, if not entirely, fictitious. Both works, therefore, in different ways contrib-uted to the removal of the element of historicity from its former position of central-ity to a peripheral role in all literary discussions on Herodotus.

This article, however, argues that historicity simply cannot be removed from any literary interpretation of Herodotus’ Scythian logos. It shows that both analyses mentioned above have serious limitations that result largely from their almost com-plete neglect of comparative, Central Asian historical material, a feature that is sadly far too common in literary, theoretical interpretations of Herodotus. The limited use of Central Asian historical or archaeological material to examine the veracity or falsity of various portions of the Scythian logos is indeed nothing new. However, this article, by subjecting the entirety of the Scythian logos to a more intensive comparative analysis, shows that the logos as a whole is far more deeply immersed in the traditions and culture of the Pontic steppe nomads than has previ-ously been thought possible by both Fehling and Hartog and indeed classical schol-arship in general.

It has often been noted that Herodotus was rather eclectic in his articulation of the image of the Scythians and other eschatoi andron in his work, drawing different elements from various Greek traditions and theories associated with the northern, nomadic barbaroi, but of course not entirely depending on them either. This article certainly does not reject the existence of literary colouring in the presentation of Scythian nomoi and traditions in the Scythian logos. Herodotus obviously did ‘mas-sage’ or ‘embellish’ the stories he had at his disposal with appropriate Greek paral-lels and the latest or trendiest theories about the north in order to make his account both intelligible and interesting to his Greek audience.3 Given the extensive cover-age of such phenomena in previous scholarship4 this article will focus more specifi-cally on the issue of steppe nomadic elements which I would argue is central, all-pervasive and integral to our understanding of the Scythian logos as a whole. It, however, rejects the Prittchett line of approach that seeks to prove Herodotus cor-rect in anyway possible.

If then it is acknowledged that Herodotus was also a literary artist as well as the truth-teller that he claimed to be, does this then negate any possibility of attribut-ing historical veracity to his representation of the Scythians? If there is any histori-cal material in Herodotus, are they simply incidental to the purpose and method of the literary artist (Herodotus)? Many critics, most notably the scholars categorised by Pritchett as the ‘liar school of Herodotus’;5 Fehling, Hartog, West and Kimball

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 11693510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 116 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 117

6 Some of their criticisms are certainly valid, especially those of West and Kimball Armayor. West’s argument (2004, 83), that Herodotus lacked first-hand information on Scythia and relied heavily on Greek informants, is probably correct. His inaccurate descriptions of the climate of Scythia (4. 28. 1) and the processes involved in the production of koumiss (West 1999), strongly suggest the likelihood of this hypothesis. Mistakes abound in his discussion on the dimensions of the Pontus (4. 85–86) (see Kimball Armayor 1978; Hind 2002, 41–43; Hartog 1988, 228). Herodotus probably did not visit Scythia personally, but his probable Greek sources, through which he evidently had access to genuine Scythian traditions, were for the most part reliable, as I will demonstrate shortly.

7 Fehling 1990, 41–49.8 Fehling 1990, 45.9 See also Kim 2009, 112–13.10 For the full version of the legend see The Secret History of the Mongols in Onon 1990, 3–9;

Cleaves 1982, 4–9. See Grousset (1948, 319) for the example of Tolui, the youngest of Genghis’ four sons who became the heir to the original patrimony of Mongolia, as the ‘l’ otchigin— le gardien du foyer’ and whose descendants eventually became the Great Khans of the empire. See also Rashid Al-Din in Boyle 1971, 163.

Armayor, were of course often strongly dismissive of Herodotus’ claims to be tell-ing a truthful account vis-à-vis the Scythians.6

Fehling in particular famously argued that Herodotus’ Histories is a work of fic-tion that is loosely based on historical facts, that his source citations in particular are quite fictitious and should be regarded as a literary device that is designed to conjure belief on the part of his audience. Fehling singles out the account of Scythian origins in the beginning of Book 4 as an outstanding example of Herodo-tus inventing his sources.7 He asserts that what is presented by Herodotus as the Scythian version of their own origin (4. 5–7) is not based on a genuine Scythian tradition, but is rather based on Greek genealogical literature with its tendency to present three brothers in the third generation: for example, Uranus and Cronus are succeeded in the third generation by Zeus, Poseidon and Hades.8

However, this story and in fact virtually all other accounts regarding the Scythi-ans in the Scythian logos, can be shown to originate from a nomadic milieu. As I will subsequently demonstrate, these steppe elements are neither incidental nor fictitious, but integral to the interpretation and understanding of the Scythian logos. The ultimate steppe provenance of the story just mentioned above can be ascer-tained by a number of features9. First of all, we can observe that the legend attributes success to the youngest child (the third son). Traditionally in steppe society it is the youngest child who receives the greatest share of the family inheritance. One strik-ing example of such a custom can be found in the foundation legend of the Mon-gol empire. According to the Secret History of the Mongols, it was the youngest son of Alanqoa, Bodonchar, the direct ancestor of Genghis Khan, who became the leader of his clan after his mother’s death.10

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 11793510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 117 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

118 HYUN JIN KIM

11 Mierow 1915, 125.12 Rashid Al-Din in Boyle 1971, 17–18.13 See Grousset’s chapters (1948) on the immediate successors of Genghis Khan, the Seljuk Turks

after Malikshah, and the Timurids. 14 Lister 1969, 19. Note also that when Genghis Khan divided his empire among his sons the

eldest son prince Jochi received as his fief the territory furthest away from Mongolia, namely Russia and the western steppe. Chaghatay the second son received central Asia and the third son Ogotai modern Dzungaria and the land of the Naiman (i.e. western Mongolia). The age of the prince was the factor that determined the distance of his territory from the original homeland of the Mongols, which fell to the youngest son Tolui. Rashid Al-Din in Boyle 1971, 163.

15 Rice 1957, 144. See also Basilov (1989a, 12–14) for samples of Scythian buckles found in modern Kazakhstan. For a suggestion that the significance of the belt lies in its symbolic value in the Indo-Iranian tradition in which it represented vassalage or dependence on a more powerful prince, see Ivantchik 1999a, 187.

16 Rudgley 2002, 94.

The fact that there are other instances in the Histories of the youngest son obtaining the kingship over his older brothers, for example Perdiccas who gains control of Macedonia (8. 137–139) and Syloson, who being the youngest of three brothers, eventually becomes the ruler of Samos after the murder of Polycrates (3. 39), does not weaken this argument, given that the peculiarities of this legend place it firmly in the context of steppe traditions and customs. Herodotus reports that Colaxais, the youngest of the three brothers, after he had obtained the kingdom, established for his own sons three lordships, one of which, where they keep the gold, was the greatest (4. 7. 2). The partition of the realm between the sons of the deceased ruler, with the largest portion falling to the designated successor (usually the youngest, though not always), is a notable feature of steppe society. The Gothic historian Jordanes in his Getica records that upon the death of Attila the Hun his vast empire was divided between his many sons.11 The same kind of division also took place after the death of Genghis Khan among the Mongols12 and in the vari-ous Turkic states such as the Seljuk sultanate and the Timurid empire.13

That Heracles in the Greek version of the foundation advises the serpent woman to send away all the sons who fail to draw his bow and put on his belt (4. 9. 5) is also extremely interesting. It is a well-attested fact that in the steppe sons other than the hearth-child are sent away from the family encampment.14 The impor-tance attached to the bow and the belt is also notable. Elaborately decorated belts were one of the items prized by the Scythian nobility as attested in the discovery of numerous belts and buckles in royal tombs.15 More importantly a warrior’s excel-lence as an archer determined his status in steppe society. The bow, the principal weapon of nomadic horsemen, was consequently regarded as the ‘insignia of rank’.16 Thus in steppe legends excellence with the bow is one of the distinguishing features of a ruler. An excellent example is the legend of Bamsi Beyrek included in the

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 11893510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 118 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 119

17 In Lewis 1982, 79. See also Braund 2002, 77–78.18 See also Visintin 2000, who, like Hartog, stresses the element of alterity in the legend. 19 Vouched for by Rostovtzeff 1993, 34.20 Ivantchik 1999a, 145. Even Fehling admits this (1990, 45).21 Ivantchik 1999a, 145–47.22 Ivantchik 1999a, 160.23 See Ivantchik 1999a, 164–65, where he gives a detailed account of the legend of the three sons

of Zoroaster. The eldest son became the priest, the second the farmer, and the third the warrior. This corresponds perfectly with the etymologies suggested for the names of the three sons of Targitaus, as in Indo-Iranian cosmology the sky (soleil) is identified with the warrior caste (Colaxais, the youngest), the earth (montagne) with the priestly caste (Lipoxais, the eldest), and the underworld (l’eau) with the producers/farmers (Arpoxais, the second son) (Ivantchik 1999a, 158). See also Corcella 1993, 232.

24 Fehling 1990, 47–48.25 Fehling 1990, 48.

mediaeval Turkish epic Dede Korkut. The young prince displays prodigious skill with the bow and manages to hit the ring worn by his principal opponent from a great distance, which impresses all the guests at the wedding feast and confirms his status as a notable hero.17 What this demonstrates is the fact that even the Greek version of the Scythians’ origin may contain elements of steppe tradition.18

Furthermore, as Ivantchik shows, the strong Indo-Iranian elements19 in the Scythian foundation legend buttress the view that Herodotus could not possibly have invented it himself and that it is indeed ultimately based on local traditions. Ivantchik notes that the element –xais with which all three names of the brothers end (Lipoxais, Arpoxais and Colaxais) are etymologically connected to the Iranian word xsaya (king).20 He also suggests quite plausible etymologies which would con-nect the names Cola, Arpo and Lipo with the Iranian words for ‘soleil’, ‘eau’ and ‘montagne’.21 Indeed the names are indicative of ‘La division du monde en trois niveaux’ which is ‘idées principales de la cosmologie indo-iranienne ce qui est attesté par plusieurs textes des Védas et de la tradition zoroastrienne’.22 The three levels evidently correspond to the three castes mentioned in various Indian and Iranian texts (priest, farmer and warrior).23 The presence of these and the other abovementioned non-Greek, steppe elements in the Scythian version of their origin suggest strongly that the ultimate source of the legend was indeed Scythian.

Fehling also lightly dismisses the third version which suggests that the Scythians were driven out of Asia by the Massagetae and subsequently displaced the Cim-merians whom they in turn put to flight. To Fehling the very notion of a succes-sion of peoples replacing each other constitutes a motif which is hardly appropriate in a serious work of reliable history.24 He argues that ‘it is the strong and the vic-torious who expand, not those in trouble’.25 Yet striking instances of the expansion of peoples who have been expelled from their original territory fill the pages of

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 11993510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 119 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

120 HYUN JIN KIM

26 See Narain 1990, 155–6 for details. 27 Grousset 1948, 69.28 For archaeological evidence of the Scythian origin in Asia, see Bokoyenko 1996. 29 For archaeological evidence for the expulsion of the Cimmerians by the Scythians, see Ony-

shkevych 1999, 25. As Tsetskhladze (2007, 42) points out, it is difficult to differentiate Scythians from Cimmerians and other peoples in the archaeological remains. In all probability the Scythians, like all the great nomadic confederations in later steppe history, were ethnically heterogeneous and probably absorbed many of the Cimmerians into their confederation in the same way that the Huns would later absorb the Alans and the Goths, thereby compounding the archaeologists’ difficulty in identifying them. For the difficulty of identifying ethnicity in archaeology, see Tsetskhladze 2006, 1xi–1xii.

30 For discussion on the role of the Scythians in the destruction of the Assyrian empire, see Gar-diner-Garden 1987, 11.

steppe history. In ca. 170 BC the Xiongnu of eastern Mongolia defeated the Indo-European tribe of the Yuezhi who fled in the direction of Bactria. The Yuezhi in turn expelled the Saka, who for their part overran the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom founded by Alexander’s successors and finally settled in eastern Iran where the region of Sistan is now named after them.26 The successes of the Avars (driven out by the Turks), Magyars (driven out by the Pechenegs) and the Cumans (driven out by the Mongols) need not be mentioned to prove my point. As Grousset explains ‘le moindre ébranlement produit à une des extrémités de la steppe entrainera sans cesse les conséquences les plus imprévues aux quatre coins de [Eurasie]’.27

The endless migration of steppe peoples from one end of the Eurasian continent to the other became an increasingly frequent phenomenon in the centuries after Herodotus’ death. However, as Herodotus himself asserts, such migrations also did take place much earlier in centuries before the writing of the Histories. Herodotus accurately demonstrates the destructive consequences of the upheavals in the steppe for sedentary peoples. The victory of the Massagetae over the Scythians in Asia (4. 11. 1),28 like that of the abovementioned Xiongnu over the Yuezhi, forces the defeated tribe to migrate to the Pontic steppe which was then inhabited by the Cimmerians. The Cimmerians in the face of the Scythian onslaught29 withdraw into Asia Minor where they almost destroy the nascent kingdom of the Lydians (1. 15). Herodotus tells us that the Cimmerians captured all of Sardis except the citadel (1. 15) and even raided Ionia (1. 6. 3).

The Herodotean version of the repercussions of the defeat of the Cimmerians for the nations of the Near East is also based on a historically valid tradition or tradi-tions. According to Herodotus, the kingdom of the Medes was destroyed by the Scythians who in pursuit of the Cimmerians took the wrong route and fell upon the Medes who were then besieging Ninus (1. 103–104).30 Scythian armies under

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12093510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 120 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 121

31 See Vaggione 1973. See also Ivantchik (1999b, 509) for information on the Scythian raid into Palestine and the citation of Jeremiah’s allusion to the disaster from the north.

32 See Ivantchik 1999b, 508–10. See also Drews 2004, 105–07, who is more critical of Herodo-tus’ account. Nonetheless the essential historicity of the narrative cannot be denied.

33 Diakonoff 1985, 95.34 Diakonoff 1985, 97.35 Mentioned in Akkadian texts as Partatua (Ivantchik 1999b, 508). 36 Diakonoff 1985, 103.37 Diakonoff 1985, 104–06.38 Diakonoff 1985, 106. See also Ivantchik 1999b, 517; Rolle 1989, 69–72; Rice 1957, 42–45;

Phillips 1965, 52–55. For the most recent general work on the Cimmerians and Scythians in history and archaeology, see Ivantchik 2001.

39 Hookham 1962, 53. 40 See Golden 1991 for examples. 41 Grousset 1948, 398.

king Madyes reached even Syrian Palestine and the Egyptian king, Psammetichus, was forced to resort to bribery to protect his country from destruction.31

Despite some chronological problems the general accuracy of this Herodotean account is confirmed by Assyrian historical records which show the presence of Cimmerians and Scythians in the Near East in the time period suggested by the historian.32 Assyrian sources report that in the year 679/8 BC the Cimmerians made an incursion into Assyria, but were defeated by king Esarhaddon.33 Shortly after this incident the Scythians make their first appearance in the Assyrian annals. Esarhaddon makes the somewhat tendentious claim that he vanquished this enemy also along with their Mannaean allies.34 He was in fact obliged to take the unprec-edented step of marrying an Assyrian princess, his own daughter, to the king of these rapacious nomads, in all likelihood Protothyes,35 the father of the famous Madyes mentioned by Herodotus (1. 103).36 Esarhaddon’s inscriptions also con-firm that the Scythians were actively involved in the war between the Medes and the Assyrians, generally supporting the Assyrians, but sometimes conspiring with the Medes37 led by a notable rebel whom I.M. Diakonoff identifies with Phraortes, the son of Deioces.38

The rapacious and erratic behaviour of the Scythians towards the conquered sedentary population (1. 106. 1) reported by Herodotus can also be understood in the light of historical evidence that highlights the contempt with which the nomads treated sedentary farmers.39 The Scythians’ wanton disregard of the rights of their subjects and their capacity at the same time to utilise sophisticated, seden-tary, institutional practices such as taxation (1. 106. 1)40 find numerous parallels in the history of other Steppe empires, for example those of the Mongols and the Timurids. Like the Scythians, the Mongols also made use of the system of taxa-tion for administrative purposes, but, as Grousset notes, did not hesitate to pillage their own subjects.41

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12193510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 121 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

122 HYUN JIN KIM

42 Rolle 1989, 74.43 Grousset 1948, 228.44 A Greek origin for the story can also be asserted. For instance the myth of the rebellion of half-

breed slaves, the Partheniai, against their Spartan masters is recorded in Aristotle’s Politics (1306b.30). See also Herodotus 6. 83 where the slaves of the Argives temporarily take over the government of the city after an Argive defeat at the hands of Sparta that left the city bereft of men.

45 Chernenko (1994, 51, citing Moruzhenko) thinks that the gold head decoration, depicting a battle scene between two old Scythians and four young warriors, found in Perederieva Mogila, Zrub-noye is visual evidence for this legend found in Herodotus.

46 Luraghi 2001, 140. See also Hornblower 2002.47 See Fowler 1996. 48 Hartog 1988, xxiii.

Even the slightly farcical tale of the Scythians’ battle against their slaves upon their return may be based on a local Scythian tradition. As Rolle points out, archae-ology attests that the whip, which the Scythians employ against their rebellious slaves, was ‘both a weapon and status symbol’ among the Scythians. ‘Ancient por-trayals of noble Scythians show the latter—with a Cossack-type whip (nagaica) in their raised hands.’ When used skilfully the whip was ‘an accurate and terrible weapon, especially when used against the unprotected face of the enemy’.42 History also shows that the whip in the steppe was a weapon intimately associated with idea of rank and status. In AD 575/6, the khan of the Western Turks, annoyed by the dealings between the Byzantines and the Avars, his defeated enemies, told the Byz-antine ambassador that the Avars were a race of runaway slaves who ‘au seul aspect de nos fouets,—rentreront dans les entrailles de la terre!’43 These features may well be indicative of the probable Scythian rather than Greek origin44 of this particular tale.45

As Luraghi notes,46 Fehling’s observations concerning Herodotus’ tendency to name the most obvious sources and his regard for party bias are essentially valid. However, his argument that Herodotus deliberately invented his sources to deceive his audience and add credibility to his account where none was actually due, is perhaps excessive.47 This is by no means to suggest that all the sources and informa-tion in Herodotus are accurate or reliable, but that caution is needed before dis-missing the undeniable steppe, nomadic element in the Histories brought to light through this comparative approach.

If Fehling is too extreme in his conclusions, the same could be said of the equally brilliant, but excessive views of the French critic Hartog who argues that Herodo-tus’ Histories are a collection of myths about the known world which the historian himself has set ‘in order within the context of Greek knowledge, and, in so doing, constructed for the Greeks a representation of their own recent past’.48 Thus, after

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12293510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 122 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 123

49 Hartog 1988, 3–6.50 Hartog 1988, 8.51 Hartog 1988, xxiii.52 Hartog 1988, 378.53 Hartog 1988, 214.54 Hartog 1988, 216.55 Hartog 1988, 201.56 Hartog 1988, 36.57 Hartog 1988, 44.58 Hartog 1988, 49.59 Hartog 1988, 202–03. See also Payen 1997, 304, 347–48.

dismissing the use of archaeological, historical, anthropological and all other ‘exter-nal’ evidence as unhelpful,49 he declares that the Scythians of Herodotus should be regarded simply as a ‘signifier’,50 symbolic of what the Greeks are not, a product of the imaginary ‘representation of the “other”’.51 Consequently to Hartog the Scythian logos is a ‘discourse on the imaginary Scythians’.52 He adds that the ‘prin-ciple of inversion’,53 for example the inversion between Hellenic nomoi and the nomoi of non-Greeks and the inversion between the north and south of the oikou-mene, should be used to understand Scythian nomoi. Details of Scythian customs that do not fit the criteria of inversion are, he claims, meaningless.54

Hartog, furthermore, insists that Herodotus’ presentation of the Scythians as a nomad power has no bearing on historical reality. He argues that the Scythians are given kings and centralised rule simply because all other barbaroi are governed by kings and that in order to categorise the Scythians among the barbaroi Herodotus, due to narrative constraint, has envisaged the unthinkable. For, he asserts, the ‘existence of a power is a denial of nomadism’.55 He also suggests that Herodotus’ account of Darius’ campaign against the Scythians is largely if not entirely ficti-tious. He insists that narrative constraint leads Herodotus to compromise historical veracity when describing the tactics used by the opposing armies in the conflict. The Scythians, so he claims, are turned into ‘Athenians of a kind’,56 while their adversaries the Persians, somewhat paradoxically, become quasi-hoplites,57 so that through their adoption of traditional Greek strategy the otherness of Scythian tac-tics may be more clearly demonstrated.58 Such is the rigidity of his application of modern, post-structuralist neo-historicism that Hartog even contemplates whether the strategy employed by the Scythians reflects the somewhat unconventional strat-egy adopted by Pericles in the opening phases of the Peloponnesian War.59

However, as clearly demonstrated thus far, Herodotus’ portrayal of the early history of the Scythians is on the whole, in the light of modern archaeology and the subsequent history of the steppe, plausible and certainly not entirely fictitious.

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12393510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 123 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

124 HYUN JIN KIM

60 Hartog 1988, 201.61 Marshall 1993, 136–37.62 See Thucydides 2. 97. 6 for a Classical Greek assessment of the military capacity of the

Scythians.63 Hartog 1988, 202.64 Hartog 1988, 19.65 Sogdian contemporary writing seems to suggest that the Xiongnu (Chinese transliteration of

their name) were called Huns by their enemies. Their connection with the European Huns is uncer-tain, but possible (see de la Vassière 2005; Torday 1997, 172; Kim 2009, 114–15).

66 See Torday 1997, 88. For a later example of state formation, social hierarchy and administra-tion of the Turkish Khaganate, see Golden 1982, 50–52.

67 Shiji 110: 9b-10b in Watson 1961, vol. 2, 162–63.68 Pulleyblank 2000, 64, also the origin of the Turkic title Tarkhan and the Mongol Daruga.

Hartog’s rather hasty assumption that the ‘existence of power is a denial of nomad-ism’60 exposes the inadequacy of his approach, as he fails to appreciate the value of comparative history that reveals the dynamic potential of nomadic peoples and their polities. In the 13th and the 14th centuries, at the height of Mongol rule,61 no one in Eurasia would have suggested that nomads cannot constitute a power. What is more, it would be difficult indeed for anyone to deny that the Huns who invaded Gaul under Attila were a formidable power. Neither would any Greek in the time of Herodotus or Herodotus himself for that matter have considered the Scythians, who one knew to have possessed the capacity to defeat the Great King Darius, incapable of power.62

Hartog’s comment that ‘a nomad power is something inconceivable: if it is a power, it can not be nomad’63 stems in fact from the mistaken presupposition that nomadism renders all development and centralisation of authority impossible. Yet Herodotus himself had no such presuppositions. He in fact speaks of a nomarch in each province of the Scythian kingdom (4. 66). In 4. 62. 1 he also mentions the nomes. This is all the more important in that the same word is used to denote administrative units of Egypt and Persia.64 To Hartog this is simply an example of Herodotus observing the principle of symmetry between Egypt and Scythia and explaining Scythian practices in Egyptian terms. However, the level of administra-tive sophistication achieved by the Xiongnu65 in Mongolia and Turkestan, whose empire co-existed with that of the Scythians, should radically alter one’s interpreta-tion of Herodotus’ account of Scythian administrative organisation.66

The Xiongnu managed to achieve an astonishing degree of centralisation. Their society was characterised by an elaborate and complex hierarchy, which is outlined in detail by the 1st-century BC Han Chinese historian Sima Qian.67 This account tells us that the Xiongnu administrative hierarchy had three levels. The supreme power rested in the hands of the Shanyu/Chanyu (emperor, originally pronounced dargwa68) who was assisted in his duties by the Ku-tu marquises who ran the cen-

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12493510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 124 15-06-2010 13:03:4415-06-2010 13:03:44

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 125

69 Kollautz and Miyakawa 1970, 44 – though it is also clear that some former rulers of conquered peoples were allowed to remain kings/chiefs as well under appropriate Xiongnu overlordship and over-kings.

70 Barfield 1981, 48–49. 71 Kollautz and Miyakawa 1970, 44. 72 Grousset 1948, 54; Barfield 1981, 49. 73 See Pulleyblank 2000, 53, for the possible Scythian impact on early Xiongnu culture. 74 Khazanov 1984, 178. The Xiongnu would develop three aristocratic clans linked via family/

marriage ties to the Shanyu: the Huyan, Lan and Xubu, which formed the ruling, upper stratum of Xiongu society (see also Pulleyblank 2000, 68). The three aristocratic clans corresponded to the three principal divisions of the empire, probably like those of the Scythians mentioned in Herodotus. These ruling clans, along with the royal family led separate subdivisions of nomads.

75 Bichler 2000, 97.

tral imperial government and co-ordinated the affairs of the empire. At the next level the 24 imperial leaders (each titled Ten Thousand Horsemen) acted as impe-rial governors for the major provinces of the empire and were usually close relatives of the Shanyu or members of the Xiongnu aristocracy.69 The successor to the throne was usually appointed the Wise king of the Left, i.e the ruler of the eastern half of the empire.

At the bottom of the administrative hierarchy was a large class of subordinate or vassal tribal leaders (sub-kings, prime ministers, chief commandants, household administrators etc.) who were under the command of the 24 imperial governors, but enjoyed a level of local autonomy70 A non-decimal system of ranks was used for the political administration of tribes and territory within the empire which included groups of many different sizes.71 However, a more rigid system of decimal ranks (thousands, hundreds, tens) was used in times of war when large armies were formed from troops drawn from different parts of the steppe under a single com-mand structure.72

It is highly probable that Herodotus was in fact referring to a similar organisa-tion among the Scythians.73 The nomarchs are likely to have been division com-manders of the kind found among the Xiongnu. The Scythian legend of their ori-gin which divides their nation into three parts (4. 7) may also reflect a similar tripartite division of power among the leading tribes which characterised the Xiongnu form of government.74 The Scythians of Herodotus, therefore, probably possessed a politically organised state and ‘sehr festen herrschaftlichen Institutio-nen’75 and comparative, historical evidence once again allows us to cross-examine the validity of Herodotus’ account.

At the pinnacle of the Scythian political structure was the king whose power, contrary to what Hartog believes, was in all probability very real and certainly not a mere product of narrative constraint which imposes the need to assign a king to

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12593510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 125 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

126 HYUN JIN KIM

76 Hartog 1988, 200.77 Yü 1990, 123. 78 Yü 1990, 124.79 Bichler 2000, 90.80 Hartog 1988, 119.81 Hartog 1988, 125.82 Melyukova 1990, 106.83 Sulimirski 1990, 154.84 Basilov and Zhukovskaya 1989, 161.85 Basilov and Zhukovskaya 1989, 161.86 Archibald 2002, 56.

every non-Greek power.76 Among the Xiongnu, to use once again the same anal-ogy, the political power wielded by the Shanyu was truly formidable. Chinese sources report that Maodun, the Shanyu, could boast of having subjugated 26 states and reduced them to obedience as a part of the Xiongnu nation.77 In war the Shanyu could reputedly mobilise an army of 140,000 men from among his sub-jects.78

Herodotus portrays the Scythian king in a similar way. As the head of the so-called Royal Scythians who held supremacy over all other groups of Scythians the king, like the Shanyu, was the military leader in times of war, as is demonstrated by Idanthyrsus’ direction of the war against the Persians. In times of peace the king was also apparently the distributor of justice and presided over duels between rela-tives (4. 65. 2). Furthermore, the taking of the census by king Ariantes (4. 81) and the punishment he used to enforce his decree (4. 81. 5) reveal the existence of royal power which turned Scythia into a real state with ‘eine bedeutende integrative Kraft’.79

The king was also evidently a semi-divine figure. The episode in 4. 68 demon-strates this fact. Herodotus informs us that the Scythians regarded the illness of their king as the direct result of ‘perjury through swearing by the royal hearths’80 by one of his subjects. ‘Perjury is thus a form of regicide.’81 This notion of the almost mystical connection between the king and his people was evidently linked to the cult and ‘deification of royal power’82 among the Scythians which in archaeology ‘is well illustrated by the toreutic—and the cult-symbols depicted on it, whose spread over the country was wide’.83 The story also provides interesting insights into Scythian judicial procedure and the importance of diviners or shamans in nomadic societies. Shamans, as V.N. Basilov notes, served ‘as intermediaries between humans and spirits (deities)’,84 and their ‘basic functions included healing diseases’,85 hence their involvement in identifying the perjurer responsible for the king’s illness.

Furthermore, Herodotus’ assertion that certain Scythians had become settled is confirmed by archaeology.86 Herodotus relates that the Budinians who are part

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12693510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 126 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 127

87 Rolle 1989, 117.88 Rolle 1989, 119.89 Rolle 1989, 119. See also Tsetskhladze 2007, 48.90 Hartog 1988, 215.91 Hartog 1988, 216.92 Hartog 1988, 216.93 Rolle 1989, 27.

Greek and part Scythian had established a town called Gelonus (4. 108. 1) which was later burned down by Darius (4. 123. 1). According to Rolle, archaeologists have discovered ‘more than a hundred —fortified settlements— in the forest steppe region’87 which closely resemble the wooden town described by Herodotus. Some scholars even believe that they have found in the large ancient settlement of Belsk the town of Gelonus.88 There is evidence of craft industry, agriculture and even horticultural activity in this town.89

Therefore, given all this evidence, Hartog’s assertion that the Scythians of Hero-dotus are merely imaginary and do not reflect the historical Scythians seems unfounded. In fact especially so when we turn our attention to the Scythian nomoi which Hartog, erroneously, views simply as the polar opposites of Greek customs, literary creations, the sole purpose of which is to provide the means of interpreting otherness. Otherness is certainly a factor, but contrary to what Hartog asserts it is impossible to explain the Scythian customs in Herodotus by simply resorting to an ‘absent Greek model’ for each and every one of them. In fact even Hartog is forced to admit that the ‘rhetorical figure of inversion is certainly too narrow to account for many of the Scythian nomoi’.90 I would argue that it accounts for very little.

Hartog dismisses all ‘the features that do not fit into the inversion’91 as either meaningless or as inventions designed to conjure belief by their very otherness.92 However, most of these ‘meaningless’ details and customs can be shown to be based on historical facts, not make-believe. For instance many of the strange and gruesome features of the burial nomoi of the Scythians recounted in great detail by Herodotus are confirmed by modern archaeology and anthropology. Herodotus relates that the corpses of Scythians other than the king are carried about for 40 days and then buried (4. 73. 1). As Rolle points out, this custom was evidently connected with the belief that ‘after 40 days the soul leaves the body’, which is typically Indo-European. In fact the ‘belief was so fundamental that it persisted until modern times in eastern European Christianity’.93

The huge burial mounds of the Scythian kings mentioned by Herodotus (4. 71. 4) still remain in the steppes of the Ukraine, as a lasting memorial to the power of these nomadic potentates. Archaeology also provides abundant evidence for the

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12793510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 127 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

128 HYUN JIN KIM

94 Rolle 1989, 29–31.95 Sulimirski 1990, 194.96 See Rudenko 1970, 25; also Rolle 1989, 43. For further references on Scythian burial customs,

see Corcella 1993, 290. 97 Mierow 1915, 123. For further information on the Huns, see Maenchen-Helfen 1973.98 Kim 2009, 114–15.99 Rolle 1989, 61–62.100 Rudenko 1970, 62, 284; Rolle 1989, 94.

grisly human sacrifices conducted in honour of the dead monarch noted by Herodo-tus (4. 71–72). Excavators have discovered in kurgans sacrificed victims, both male and female, buried together with the dead king.94 In one particularly well-known royal grave from around 400 BC excavated in Chertomlyk the wife, several serfs and a groom95 were found together with the dead monarch, which of course reminds us of Herodotus’ comment that one concubine, groom and other attendants of the Scythian king were throttled to death to accompany their master (4. 71. 4).

Furthermore, the sacrifice of horses, which accompanied the offering of human victims, is confirmed by the presence of horse skeletons in Scythian tombs. In one Scythian tomb located in Pazyryk over 150 horse remains have been found together with the corpses of 15 human victims.96 In addition the mutilation of the flesh, which characterises the ritual mourning for the dead king among the Scythians (4. 71. 2), is a custom that is widespread among the nomads of Eurasia. Jordanes reports that the Huns who superseded the Scythians and Sarmatians as the masters of the western steppe, upon the death of Attila, ‘plucked out the hair of their heads and made their faces hideous with deep wounds, that the renowned warrior might be mourned, not by effeminate wailings and tears, but by the blood of men’.97 The resemblance between the two set of customs is obvious for all to see.98

Herodotus also records that when the Scythians enter into a sworn agreement they take blood from the parties to the agreement by making a little cut in the body with an awl or a knife, and pour it mixed with wine into a big earthenware bowl, into which they then dip a scimitar and arrows and an axe and a javelin. When this is done, those swearing the agreement, and the most valued members of their retinue, drink the blood after solemn curses (4. 70). Depictions on excavated gold plaques from the Scythian era show that such a custom did indeed exist and was linked to the custom of blood-brotherhood.99

Herodotus’ information on the Scythians inhaling the smoke and fumes emitted by burning cannabis seeds (4. 75. 1), which he evidently regarded as a form of vapour bath, has also been proved accurate. As Rudenko and Rolle points out, ‘whole sets of hemp-inhaling equipment were found in the frozen tombs’100 of the Scythians of

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12893510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 128 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 129

101 Rolle 1989, 98.102 Rudenko 1970, 211.103 West 1988, 211. 104 West 1988, 208.105 Grousset 1948, 561.106 Sinor 1990a, 13.

the Altai. Herodotus, who probably had never smoked pot, naively attributes the howls of joy of the Scythians to their enjoyment of the vapour bath.

Even the somewhat unbelievable story of the Scythians chasing after a hare rather than engaging the exasperated Persians (4. 134. 1) may be based on a local tradition. Indeed pictorial representations on the gold plaques excavated from Scythian royal tombs suggest that a ‘Scythian national sport of particular interest was the spearing of hares from horseback’.101 King Scyles’ bizarre marriage to his father’s widow (4. 78) also concurs with the steppe practice noted by the Chinese in their dealings with the Xiongnu and Wusun,102 whereby the son inherits his father’s wives with the exception of his own birth mother.

It is also interesting to note that the ultimatum sent by the Scythians to Darius (4. 131–132) ‘has a good claim to historicity’.103 The Scythians send Darius a bird, a mouse, a frog and five arrows as symbols warning of the imminent destruction of his army. A similar ultimatum, West demonstrates, was sent in historical times by Toktai, the khan of the Golden Horde, to his all too powerful vassal Nogai. Toktai sent ‘as a declaration of war a hoe, an arrow and a handful of earth, which Nogai interpreted thus: “If you hide in the earth, I will dig you out. If you rise to the heavens, I will shoot you down. Choose a battlefield.”’104 In fact this method of communication between enemies was extremely common among the nomads of the steppe. For example in 1510 Muhammad Shaybani, the khan of the Uzbeks, sent to Shah Isma’il of Persia a dervish’s begging bowl as an insult designed to poke fun at the fact that the Shah’s ancestors were dervishes and at the same time a threat demanding the surrender of all temporal powers to the legitimate ruler of the world, that is himself, the descendent of Genghis Khan.105

One other aspect of the Scythian logos still needs to be discussed, namely the military tactics of the Scythians. The strategic withdrawals and harrying tactics employed by the Scythians of Herodotus in their war against the Persians reflect the mode of warfare used by every nomadic army against a numerically superior sedentary foe. As Sinor comments, the Scythians ‘brought virtually to perfection a method of warfare which, for almost two thousand years, held its own against other military systems, without undergoing significant improvements’.106 In fact ‘Scythian tactics’ were still being used with success in the 15th century by the nomadic Oirats

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 12993510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 129 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

130 HYUN JIN KIM

107 For a more detailed account of the conflict between Esen and the Chinese emperor (who, unlike Darius, failed to escape and was held in captivity for some years), see Rossabi 1998, 233–34.

108 Sinor 1990a, 8.109 Hartog 1988, 202.110 Pritchett (1993, 200) makes reference to the fact that the historians of Alexander provide

descriptions of Scythians tactics that parallel the descriptions given by Herodotus.111 There are certainly narrative parallels between the Scythian war and the Graeco-Persian war

and a degree of invention on the part of Herodotus is entirely conceivable. See Bichler 2000, 295; Bornitz 1968, 125–27. However, steppe elements are also clearly present in the account.

whose Taishi (prince) Esen, like the Scythian Idanthyrsus before him, inflicted a terrible defeat upon a sedentary emperor by luring his enemy deep into nomad ter-ritory and then destroying his army piecemeal through harrying tactics.107

Herodotus astutely notes that the Scythians’ dependence upon cattle for food rather than on cultivated land (4. 46. 3) allowed them to successfully implement these tactics. The excellent quality of the horses of the steppe108 was another decisive fac-tor in determining the outcome of the almost incessant conflict between the nomads of the steppe and their sedentary enemies. Herodotus’ comment that the Scythian horse always routed the Persian horse and the Persian cavalry would fall back in flight on their infantry (4. 128. 3), suggests that he was probably aware of this fact.

Herodotus even regards nomadism, which made these tactics feasible, not sim-ply as a way of life, but a ‘strategy which imposes a way of life’109 (4. 46). Hartog regards this conception of nomadism as a strategy as the natural consequence of Herodotus’ attempt to turn the Scythians into quasi-Athenians. As noted earlier, the Scythian war is in Hartog’s view a largely fictitious story that is designed to mirror the greater conflict between the Greeks and Persians. Thus the strategy employed by the Scythians is also regarded by him as merely a reflection of the strategy adopted by the Athenians in the war against Xerxes or possibly of Periclean strategy of the Peloponnesian War.

However, as I have already demonstrated, the distinguishing features of the Scythians’ war against Darius, their strategic withdrawals and harrying tactics, are those that one would expect to find in a war involving a nomadic power. The strategy of Idanthyrsus has far more in common with those of the Xiongnu and the Mongols than with any improvised strategy on the part of the Greeks.110 It is fair to say that it is native to the steppe.111 The two conflicts, as they are presented by Herodotus, could not be more different. The Scytho-Persian war ends without a single pitched battle being fought. The issue of the Graeco-Persian war, however, in complete contrast is determined by decisive battles. What is more, the Scythians

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13093510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 130 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 131

112 The tenacious pursuit of the Scythians find parallels in the famous pursuits of the Mongols of their defeated foes. The pursuit of the Khwarezm Shah by the generals Jebe and Subotai Bahadur is particularly noteworthy. See Grousset 1944, 340–46 and Jackson 2009, 31.

113 As Lateiner (1989, 156) points out Herodotus’ geography of Eastern Europe is hopelessly confused and the details of the narrative of the war itself is likewise difficult to explain or even to justify. This may well reflect his lack of first-hand knowledge of the region.

114 Hartog 1988, 46.115 Hinge 2003, 69.

are tenacious in their pursuit of the defeated enemy, as befits a nomadic army.112 The Greeks in contrast are only too glad to see Xerxes withdrawing to Persia with the bulk of his army and do not try to deter his return. Whether the Scythian war actually did involve a march across enormous distances, as Herodotus suggests, is another question altogether and is really unknowable.113

Thus Herodotus or his sources evidently did possess a greater understanding of steppe society and its military practices than modern critics such as Hartog give him credit for. The oddities and extremes that he mentions in his account of Scythian life and history are mostly historical realities, not make-believe. Indeed Hartog’s attempt to turn the Scythians with the quasi-Athenians and his near com-plete neglect of the historical element in the Scythian logos produce some awkward discrepancies and irregularities. For instance there is a great deal of confusion as to who exactly constitutes the quasi-hoplites (i.e. the Athenians).

For Hartog the Scythians are the quasi-Athenians fighting against a despotic power, namely Persia. Yet in Scythia the Persian army, which should logically be the anti-hoplite force, more closely resembles the conventional Greek hoplite army than the defenders, the nomadic Scythians. Hartog himself is forced to admit this very fact. He notes that the ‘army of Darius appears as a quasi-Greek army’114 in Scythia, since it includes the infantry that the Scythians, being a purely cavalry force, lack. Therefore, we are left with a paradoxical picture in which the quasi-Athenians are found waging war in a manner that is more similar to the mode of warfare of the aggressor, the Persians.

As Hinge suggests, in the case of the Scythians at least, the analogies and patterns that arise occasionally between Greeks and Scythians are not necessarily due to the ‘interpolation of Greek categories into a Scythian context’. They are rather ‘the result of the formulation of Scythian customs and beliefs in a Greek discourse’;115 i.e. they should rather be regarded as indicators of Herodotus’ attempt to Hellenise the Scythians to the extent that their behaviour and history would become intelli-gible to a Greek audience.

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13193510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 131 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

132 HYUN JIN KIM

The uniquely Scythian elements in the account of the Scythian war and the description of Scythian customs show that Herodotus understands and appreciates the distinctive features of Scythian society and are a telling proof that he does not try to make unnecessary analogies or create non-existent polarities. They also indi-cate clearly that genuine steppe customs and traditions are central to his overall representation of the Scythians in the Scythian logos. However, this by no means suggests that there is no validity in the doubts raised by a number of critics con-cerning Herodotus’ accuracy nor is it a denial of the reality of the limited applica-tion of both past and contemporary Greek theoretical constructs on the Scythians in the Histories by Herodotus.

Most of the steppe customs and historical details that we have presented in this arti-cle would be known to scholars engaged in the research of Central Asian history and nomad customs. He or she would be highly amused and perplexed by the fact that anyone could possibly consider them to be make-believe. Yet this is exactly what is asserted by arguably the two most prominent Herodotean scholars of the past five decades! Such an embarrassing situation arises, as has been shown throughout this article, from the tendency in current literary scholarship on the Scythian logos to largely neglect or treat as peripheral non-Greek and non-European historical and comparative material even when analysing the account of a people beyond this geo-graphical or conceptual boundary. Hartog and Fehling, though approaching the text from radically different perspectives, nonetheless arrive at the same erroneous con-clusions precisely because neither a solely text-based, empirical analysis as in the case of Fehling or a strictly theoretical and literary interpretation (Hartog), though both are valuable in their own right and have contributed to the development of Hero-dotean scholarship, can adequately grasp the full breadth of Herodotean inquiry.

Fixation with the ‘truth’ had clouded earlier scholarship on Herodotus and Har-tog’s innovative, neo-historicist analysis marked a fresh break away from this cycle. However, his approach fails in the sense that it creates a too rigid a barrier between history and literature (extremely odd) and restricts the Histories to an arguably post-structuralist, European, cultural framework. In short a more balanced approach that is more comprehensive, interdisciplinary and comparative must be adopted in the future literary interpretation of Herodotus.

Bibliography

Archibald, Z.H. 2002: ‘The Shape of the New Commonwealth: Aspects of the Pontic and Eastern Mediterranean Regions in the Hellenistic Age’. In Tsetskhladze and Snodgrass 2002, 49–72.

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13293510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 132 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 133

Barfield, T. 1981: ‘The Hsiung-nu Imperial Confederacy: Organization and Foreign Policy’. Journal of Asian Studies 41.1, 45–61.

Basilov, V.N. 1989a: ‘Introduction’. In Basilov 1989b, 1–18. —. (ed.) 1989b: Nomads of Eurasia (Exhibition Catalogue) (Seattle/Los Angeles).Basilov, V.N. and Zhukovskaya, N.L. 1989: ‘Religious Beliefs’. In Basilov 1989b, 161–81.Bichler, R. 2000: Herodots Welt (Berlin).Bokoyenko, N.A. 1996: ‘Asian influence on European Scythia’. ACSS 3.1, 97–122.Bornitz, H. 1968: Herodot-Studien (Berlin).Boyle, J.A. 1971: The Successor of Genghis Khan (New York/London).Braund, D. 2002: ‘The Myths of Panticapaeum: Construction of Colonial Origins in the Black Sea

Region’. In Tsetskhladze and Snodgrass 2002, 73–80.Chernenko, E.V. 1994: ‘Investigations of the Scythian Tumuli in the Northern Pontic Steppe’. ACSS

1.1, 45–53.Cleaves, F.W. 1982: The Secret History of the Mongols (Cambridge, MA).Corcella, A. 1993: Erodoto, Le Storie. Libro IV, La Scizia e la Libia (Milan).de la Vaissière, E. 2005: ‘Huns et Xiongnu’. Central Asiatic Journal 49.1, 3–26. Diakonoff, I.M. 1985: ‘Media’. In Gershevitch, I. (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 2

(Cambridge), 36–148. Drews, R. 2004: Early Riders: The Beginning of Mounted Warfare in Asia and Europe (New York/

London).Fehling, D. 1971: Die Quellenangaben bei Herodot: Studien zur Erzählkunst Herodots (Berlin/

New York).—. 1990: Herodotus and his ‘Sources’: Citation, Invention and Narrative Art (Leeds). Fowler, R. 1996: ‘Herodotus and his Contemporaries’. JHS 116, 62–87.Gardiner-Garden, J.R. 1987: Ktesias on Early Central Asian History and Ethnography (Papers on Inner

Asia 6) (Bloomington).Golden, P.B. 1982: ‘Imperial Ideology and the Sources of Political Unity amongst the Pre-Cinggisid

Nomads of Western Eurasia’. Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 2, 37–76. —. 1991: ‘Nomads and their Sedentary neighbors in Pre-Cinggisid Eurasia’. Archivum Eurasiae Medii

Aevi 7, 41–81.Grousset, R. 1944: Le Conquérant du Monde (Paris).—. 1948: L’Empire des Steppes (Paris). Hartog, F. 1980: Le miroir d’Hérodote: essai sur la représentation de l’autre (Paris).—. 1988: The Mirror of Herodotus: The Representation of the Other in the Writing of History (Berkeley/

London).Hind, J.G.F. 2002: ‘Herodotus on the Black Sea Coastline and Greek Settlements: Some Modern

Misconceptions’. In Tsetskhladze and Snodgrass 2002, 41–47.Hinge, G. 2003: ‘Scythian and Spartan analogies in Herodotus’ representation; Rites of initiation

and kinship groups’. In Bilde, P.G., Højte, J.M. and Stolba, V.F. (eds.), The Cauldron of Arian-tas: Studies Presented to A.N. Sceglov on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday (Aarhus), 62–68.

Hookham, H. 1962: Tamburlaine the Conqueror (London).Hornblower, S. 2002: ‘Herodotus and his sources of information’. In Bakker, E.J., de Jong, I.J.F.

and van Wees, H. (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Herodotus (Leiden/Boston), 373–86.Ivantchik, A.I. 1999a: ‘Une légende sur l’origine des Scythes (Hdt. IV, 5–7) et le problème des

sources du “scythicos logos” d’Hérodote’. REG 112.1, 141–92.—. 1999b: ‘The Scythian “Rule over Asia”: the Classical Tradition and Historical Reality’. In Tset-

skhladze, G.R. (ed.), Ancient Greeks West and East (Leiden/Boston/Cologne), 497–520. —. 2001: Kimmerier und Skythen. Kulturhistorische und chronologische Probleme der Archaïologie der

osteuropaïschen Steppen und Kaukasiens in vor- und frühskythischer Zeit (Moscow).Jackson, P. 2009: ‘The Mongol Age in Eastern Inner Asia’. In Di Cosmo, N., Allen, J.F. and Golden,

P.B. (eds.), The Cambridge History of Inner Asia: The Chinggisid Age (Cambridge), 26–45.

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13393510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 133 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

134 HYUN JIN KIM

Khazanov, A.M. 1984: Nomads and the Outside World (Cambridge).Kim, H.J. 2009: Ethnicity and Foreigners in Ancient Greece and China (London).Kimball Armayor, O. 1978: ‘Did Herodotus ever go to the Black Sea?’. Harvard Studies in Classical

Philology 82, 45–62.Kollautz, A. and Miyakawa, H. 1970: Geschichte und Kultur eines völkerwanderungszeitlichen

Nomadenvolks: die Rouran der Mongolei und die Awaren in Mitteleuropa, 2 vols. (Klagenfurt).Lateiner, D. 1989: The Historical Method of Herodotus (Toronto/London). Lewis, G. 1982: The Book of Dede Korkut (Singapore).Lister, R.P. 1969: The Secret History of Genghis Khan (London). Luraghi, N. 2001: The Historian’s Craft in the Age of Herodotus (Oxford/New York).Maenchen-Helfen, J.O. 1973: The World of the Huns (Berkeley). Marshall, R. 1993: Storm from the East (Los Angeles). Melyukova, A.I. 1990: ‘The Scythians and Sarmatians’. In Sinor 1990b, 97–117.Mierow, C.C. 1915: The Gothic History of Jordanes (Princeton) Narain, A.K. 1990: ‘Indo-Europeans in Inner Asia’. In Sinor 1990b, 151–76.Onon, U. 1990: The History and the Life of Chinggis Khan: The Secret History of the Mongols

(Leiden). Onyshkevych, L. 1999: ‘Scythia and the Scythians’. In Reeder, E.D. (ed.), Scythian Gold (New York),

23–36. Payen, P. 1997: Les îles nomades: conquérir et résister dans l’Enquête d’Hérodote (Paris).Phillips, E.D. 1965: The Royal Hordes Nomad Peoples of the Steppe (London).Pritchett, W.K. 1993: The Liar School of Herodotus (Amsterdam).Pulleyblank, E.G. 2000: ‘The Hsiung-nu’. In Roemer, H.R. (ed.), History of the Turkic Peoples in the

Pre-Islamic Period (Berlin), 52–75.Rice, T.T. 1957: The Scythians (London). Rolle, R. 1989: The World of the Scythians (London).Rossabi, M. 1998: ‘The Ming and Inner Asia’. In Twitchett, D. and Mote, F.W. (eds.), The Cam-

bridge History of China, vol. 8 (Cambridge), 221–71.Rostovtzeff, M.I. 1993: Skythien und der Bosphorus, 2: Wiederentdeckte Kapitel und Verwandtes, ed.

H. Heinen (Stuttgart).Rudenko, S.I. 1970: Frozen Tombs of Siberia: the Pazyryk Burials of Iron Age Horseman (London).Rudgley, R. 2002: Barbarians (London/Oxford). Sinor, D. 1990a: ‘Introduction: The Concept of Inner Asia’. In Sinor 1990b, 1–18.—. (ed.) 1990b: The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia (Cambridge).Sulimirski, T. 1990: ‘The Scyths’. In Gershevitch, I. (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 2

(Cambridge), 149–99. Thomas, R. 2000: Herodotus in Context: Ethnography, Science and the Art of Persuasion (Cam-

bridge).Torday, L. 1997: Mounted Archers: The Beginnings of Central Asian History (Edinburgh).Tsetskhladze, G.R. 2006: ‘Revisiting Ancient Greek Colonisation’. In Tsetskhladze, G.R. (ed.),

Greek Colonisation: An Account of Greek Colonies and Other Settlements Overseas, vol. 1 (Leiden/Boston), xxiii–1xxxiii.

—. 2007: ‘Pots and Pandemonium: The Earliest East Greek Pottery from the North Pontic Native Settlements’. Pontica 40, 37–70.

Tsetskhladze, G.R. and Snodgrass, A.M. (eds.) 2002: Greek Settlements in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea (Oxford).

Vaggione, R.P. 1973: ‘Over all Asia? The extent of the Scythian domination in Herodotus’. Journal of Biblical Literature 92, 523–30.

Visintin, M. 2000: ‘Echidna, Skythes e l’arco di Herakles’. Materiali e Discussioni per l’Analisi dei Testi Classici 45, 43–81.

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13493510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 134 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

HERODOTUS’ SCYTHIANS VIEWED FROM A CENTRAL ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 135

Watson, B. 1961: Records of the Grand Historian of China (Shih chi), vol. 2 (New York).West, S. 1988: ‘The Scythian Ultimatum (Herodotus 4.131,132)’. JHS 108, 207–11. —. 1999: ‘Introducing the Scythians: Herodotus on koumiss (4.2)’. MusHelv, 76–86. —. 2004: ‘Herodotus and Scythia’. In Karageorghis, V. and Taifacos, I. (eds.), The World of Herodo-

tus (Nicosia), 73–89.Yü, Y.S. 1990: ‘The Hsiung-nu’. In Sinor 1990b, 118–50.

St Paul’s College9 City Road

CamperdownNSW 2050

Australiahyunjin.kim@usyd.edu.au

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13593510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 135 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45

93510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 13693510_AWE9_2010_07.indd 136 15-06-2010 13:03:4515-06-2010 13:03:45