For the reading groups etc? Basically…I’ve wasted a lot of my free time these last few months and need a kick up the backside and Herodotos is great, we don’t have to do it all.
I want to start reading Herodotos in a month or so, after having finished Plato’s Symposium. But my Greek is only intermediate level at best, so I’m far from sure if I can keep up with you.
I was also thinking about Herodotus. I will be on holiday for the next three weeks (indeed, going to Greece 
) but after that I would love to join a reading group.
My local library has:
Michael A. Flower, John Marincola, Herodotus: Histories Book IX. Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. review: http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2003/2003-07-14.html
So I might be dipping into book IX. Helma Dik wrote her dissertation on Herodotus which I have read so many times I have it almost memorized. She approaches it from her own variant of Functional Grammar which is more accessible than other variants I am familiar with.
On the other hand, I am a little weary of reading about wars. It seems that historians both ancient and modern think that war is the only thing worth writing about.
I hadn’t thought of 9 actually. I definitely envisioned 1 being there, probably skip 2 and its bloody Egyptian logoi…
Actually one of the reasons I thought about Herodotos is that, despite the wars, its a treasure trove of Greek culture and ethnography and owes a massive debt to Homer. He’s just great to read. So dw, its not all fighting. It even has a guy dancing naked, upside, on a table with no underwear.
I’ll have to check that book out, I’ve her book on Tragic Word Order. Its very interesting, I usually shy away from these more modern theoretical linguistic works but I liked it.
Functional Grammar FG is modern but not at all new. Some of the SIL[1] folks who studied under Talmy Givón in their youth are now retired. FG is useful for discussion of pragmatic marking and a few other things. Not something I get excited about now days.
[1]SIL-International http://www.sil.org
Seriously, shall we pick a book and get started July5? I’m game.
Scribo asked
Why Not Herodotos?
I’ll tell you why not. I’ll tell you why I, for one, have stayed away from Herodotos. My sense is that he is a little harder than Homer. You still have the weird Ionic forms you have to learn, plus you have the more complicated Attic-like syntax. And Herodotos is nowhere near as good a writer as Homer. At Homer’s sentences one stops and marvels. I don’t think anyone would ever say that about Herodotus.
So, if an author is harder than Homer, and not as good as Homer, why would you read him instead of Homer?
Haha well now this is all subjective and certainly any appreciation of Homer must also be won from understanding related texts, there are a myriad of reasons to read elsewhere. 
I don’t think Herodotos is much harder than Homer, if at all, I certainly think he’s best enjoyed in a group. From a purely language pov its worth mentioning that reading him helps not only with epic but also with the pre-Socratic philosophers and, tbf, most prose.
However whilst I’m happy the way this thread is going, people ought to feel free to suggest other authors. I just want it to be prose and not hitherto covered, nor too late. Also easily accessible, so no fragments of Hellanikos or whatever.
I have only dabbled on and off in Herodotos whlle reading monographs and grammars which cite him. Didn’t get blown away by the difficulty. Certainly easier than Tragedy.
I will probably be struggling to keep up but if it is Herodotos I will at least give it a try.
For those in the dark, or worried about the differences in Herodotus vs. other authors, Geoffrey Steadman’s edition of Book 1 is a good place to start. It is available by CC license at http://geoffreysteadman.com/files-herodotus/. It provides a nice core vocabulary list and running vocabulary for the text itself.
As to this post from Markos:
Your sense is that he is harder, suggesting that you haven’t delved too deeply. If true, how can you know that he is “nowhere near as good a writer as Homer”? That said, reading Homer prior to Herodotus does, I believe, enlighten Herodotus’ project quite a bit.
Cheers,
Eliot
Steadman is also working on an annotated edition of book VII. A beta-version is already available http://geoffreysteadman.com/herodotus-7/
I like the format. The running vocabulary certainly cuts down on the lexical work for students doing a quick read through.
Elliot wrote: Your sense is that he is harder, suggesting that you haven’t delved too deeply. If true, how can you know that he is “nowhere near as good a writer as Homer”?
That’s a fair point. I will read some more Herodotos and test my initial impressions.
Clayton on Steadman:
I like the format. The running vocabulary certainly cuts down on the lexical work for students doing a quick read through.
I’m sold on the format, because, although it is Grammar-Translation, it is MINIMAL Grammar-Translation, and it allows the reader to get back to reading the Greek as quickly as possible. Steadman’s site says that Oedipus Rex is coming out this summer, which is noteworthy as the first attempt to do Greek drama with the format. Up until now, both Steadman and Hayes-Nimis have chosen fairly easy texts.
I just finished the Agamemnon of Aeschylus and might read a bit of Herodotus. But don’t count on me. I think the most natural point to start is from the beginning, that is book 1.
For me, whether somebody who lived 2500 years ago was a good writer or not is secondary. What I mean is that even a bad writer can be important and interesting. Take the guy who wrote the Gospel of Mark for example… (Ok, I’m being provocative, maybe the Gospel of Mark isn’t bad writing, but the style is a bit naive.) Good writing is a plus but even bad writers can teach us a lot.
Just so you know, if you do have some vocabulary help (for any words that are not common*), Herodotus is pretty simple. I never delved into Ionic but never had problems with Herodotus. There’s a very definite but rather small list of differences between Ionic and Attic and, with a little bit of time and practice (really, really little) you’re golden.
*For example, I got pretty screwed up by being too blase about the whole thing and having to translate in Uni a part about votive offerings in Delphi. 
Michael A. Flower, John Marincola, Herodotus: Histories Book IX. Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. review: > http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2003/2003-07-14.html
This arrived yesterday at the library. It is a small format paperback, with type just on the margin of difficult for people beyond sixty yo. There are about 215 pages of commentary and the rest is introduction, text and appendices. Tried to read it but the binding is so tight I can not see the type in the gutter without breaking the back on the book. Anyway, I don’t suppose anyone here is going to be reading book 9 if you start from the beginning.
Not much interest here in reading Acts so I am sort of casting about for a new project.
Ok well we can put it off if you like, I heard 5th of July to be the date anyway, so you might chance you’re mind. Though by then I’ll be elbow deep in Latin so it will be a nice change of pace. Plus I’m teaching Sanskrit for Classicists as a summer thing so I need Herodotos.
I totally agree with comment on quality but we’ve had this discussion elsewhere and we all agree.
Did you have Voskos as teacher? Curiosity.
For Herodotos most of the commentaries I’ve been looking at have been historical, I’ll keep looking.
How and Wells’ commentary (1912), available on Project Gutenberg, seems to be, still, the only complete commentary in English. When reading H. in translation (Grene) many years ago, I found their commentary to be quite helpful.
Cheers,
Eliot