Segunda fase: reconocimiento de representaciones sobre el uso y

After the battle of Salamis, Themistocles failed to win the first honor of those who fought at Salamis. He did, however, win a majority of the second place votes and so he went to Lacedaemon “hoping to be honored” (θέλωντιμηθῆναι, 8.124.2).41 Themistocles is characterized as “by far the most clever man among all those in Greece” (ἀνὴρπολλὸνἙλλήνωνσοφώτατοςἀνὰπᾶσαντὴνἙλλάδα, 8.124.1) and won an olive crown for his “cleverness and skill” (σοφίηςδὲκαὶδεξιότητος, 8.124.2). In this brief episode, a certain Timodemus from Aphidnae challenges Themistocles for failing to credit those to whom credit is due.42 _{Herodotus emphasizes in this exchange how} Themistocles manipulates the language of his abuser with a forceful and witty retort. In this way, too, we see Themistocles display the “cleverness and skill” (σοφίηςδὲκαὶ δεξιότητος, 8.124.2) for which he had been recognized in connection with Salamis (8.125-126.1): ὡςδὲἐκτῆςΛακεδαίμονοςἀπίκετοἐςτὰςἈθήνας, ἐνθαῦταΤιμόδημοςἈφιδναῖος, τῶν ἐχθρῶνμὲντῶνΘεμιστοκλέοςἐών, ἄλλωςδὲοὐτῶνἐπιφανέωνἀνδρῶν, φθόνῳ καταμαργέωνἐνείκεετὸνΘεμιστοκλέα, τὴνἐςΛακεδαίμοναἄπιξινπροφέρων, ὡςδιὰ τὰςἈθήναςἔχοιτὰγέρεατὰπαρὰΛακεδαιμονίων, ἀλλ᾽οὐδι᾽ἑωυτόν. ὁδέ, ἐπείτεοὐκ ἐπαύετολέγωνταῦταὁΤιμόδημος, εἶπε·Οὕτωἔχειτοι·οὔτ᾽ἂνἐγὼἐὼνΒελβινίτης ἐτιμήθηνοὕτωπρὸςΣπαρτιητέων, οὔτ᾽ἂνσὺ, ὤνθρωπε, ἐὼνἈθηναῖος. Ταῦταμέννυνἐςτοσοῦτοἐγένετο, …

When Themistocles came back to Athens from Lacedaemon, thereupon Timodemus of Aphidnae, one of Themistocles’ enemies but otherwise not well-known, was stark mad

41 _{In De Malig. 871C-D, Plutarch suggests that Herodotus wrongly and intentionally robbed}

Themistocles of his due honors from the Battle of Salamis and even used the Pythian Apollo to spread his lie that Aeginetans deserved the greatest credit for the victory. Moreover, Plutarch seems to

acknowledge the influence of Aesop on Herodotus: “No more fictions now, in which Scythians and Persians and Egyptians are made to speak as Aesop uses crows and monkeys: he uses the Pythian god himself to put down Athens from pride of place at Salamis” (de Malig. 871C-D; tr. Bowen 1992, 87). Cf. Kurke 2006.

42 _{Flory 1987, 180 n. 8, calls our attention to the pun found in the name Timodemus (“honored by}

with jealousy and upbraided Themistocles. He brought up his departure to

Lacedaemon, how through the Athenians he had the honors from the Lacedaemonians, but not through his own efforts. When Timodemus did not stop saying these things, Themistocles said, “You’re right. If I were from Belbina43 _{I wouldn’t have been honored}

in this way by the Spartiates, but you, man, wouldn’t have been honored even even if you were from Athens!”

This matter, then, went only this far…

The first part of his comment, given by Herodotus in oratio recta to give the fullest effect to Themistocles’ insult, is conciliatory—Themistocles agrees that his affiliation with Athens helped him to receive honors in Sparta. The second half of Themistocles’ witty reply, however, isolates Timodemus for ridicule. More like 8.59 than 8.61, Timodemus’ attack and Themistocles’ response are personal, for they concern the individual honors due (or not due) to Themistocles, rather than the prestige that Athens deserves for her role in saving Greece. Themistocles plays on the attack only to show that Timodemus is missing the real point—Timodemus is a nobody.44 _{Herodotus signals this succinctly and} unobtrusively in the vocative address “O man” (ὤνθρωπε) that removes all distinction from Timodemus and reduces him to the position of a generic man.

Herodotus provides a clue for the humor of this brief phrase in Themistocles’ reply when he first introduces Timodemus in the passage. Through authorial

comment, Herodotus establishes that Timodemus’ whole identity is due to

43 _{How and Wells (1912/1928) note that “Belbina is a rocky islet about ten miles south of Sunium}

at the entrance of the Saronic gulf, now St. George. It remained a separate community (Scylax, 52), paying tribute as late as 425 B.C. (C. I. A. i. 37; Hicks, 64). It is here a mere example of an utterly

unimportant place (Teles in Stobaeus, xl. 8 ὀνειδίζουσιμὲνὅτιΚύθνιοςἢὅτιΜυκόνιοςἢὅτιΒελβινίτης), the assailant of Themistocles being an Athenian (§ 2) of Aphidna (§ 1), and the saying meaning, ‘I should not have received this honour had I been of Belbina, nor will you though you are (like me) an Athenian.’ Plato (Rep. 329 E, followed by Cic. de Sen. 3. 8, Plut. Them. 18) spoils the double point of the story by making the assailant himself a Seriphian.”

44 _{As Macan points out, Herodotus is vague with his use of ἐὼν, and if he is questioning, as I have}

translated, whether Timodemus is even Athenian, the humor of the insult is that much more biting: “The first ἐὼν is obviously hypothetical: why not the second too? In which case the retort of Themistokles has the added sting of insinuating ξενία against this ἄνθρωπος” (1908, note to 8.125).

Themistocles (τῶνἐχθρῶνμὲντῶνΘεμιστοκλέοςἐών, ἄλλωςδὲοὐτῶνἐπιφανέων

ἀνδρῶν). Moreover, Herodotus’ report of Timodemus’ behavior before he addresses

Themistocles further emphasizes his insignificance: he was “raging with jealousy”

(φθόνῳκαταμαργέων). Indeed, Henry Immerwahr characterizes this entire exchange

by saying that “the idea of envy is central to the famous anecdote of Themistocles and Timodemus of Aphidna.”45 _{Timodemus can exist only under the shadow of the}

Athenian general because he has no concerns of his own other than Themistocles. He cannot even have his own desires, but rather is only jealous that Themistocles has achieved a high social and political standing. By his use of these verbal cues, then, Herodotus presents the audience with a feed before he delivers the punchline,

ὤνθρωπε, through the mouth of Themistocles.

Herodotus offers one last clue to the effectiveness of Themistocles’ humorous insult by the succinct phrase Ταῦταμέννυνἐςτοσοῦτονἐγένετο... (8.126.1). We are invited to consider the role of Themistocles’ response here as part of an escalation in Athenian intolerance of free speech, something we will see in the next example (8.111) not in Themistocles’ speech, but in his actions.46

Immerwahr uses this anecdote to characterize the Greeks at Salamis as a whole: “Thus the story of Salamis ends in discord, but not without reference to the greatness of both Themistocles and Athens.”47 _{It is informative to contrast the general image of}

45 _{1966, 286.}

46 _{Most shockingly, we think of the Athenians’ stoning of the dissenter Lycides in 9.4, which, as}

Raaflaub (2006, 209) points out, belies their adherence to “the principal of general isēgoria (equality of speech, 5.78).” The Athenians’ intolerance is further emphasized at the end of 9.5, when the Athenian women subsequently go to Lycides’ home and stone his wife to death, thus extending the outrage from the public to the private sphere and grimly punctuating the episode.

the fracturing of the Greek forces with the other source of information about the battle of Salamis: Aeschylus’ Persians. As Griffin has recently noted in an article on Herodotus and tragedy, the Greeks in the Persians appear to be united without the same sort of squabbling that we see here:

All this shady stuff, besmirching the radiance of Our Finest Hour, still distressed Plutarch centuries later; no trace of it appears in Aeschylus’ play, which presents the Greeks as united, sailing out together for battle in determined mood (Persae 384-411). The wrangling and dissension were too complex for tragedy, too ‘political’ in the wrong sense; they blurred the clear contrast of Greek and barbarian, and the purposes of heaven… Details of individual achievements are not for the austere taste of tragedy, which will not even name Themistocles. (Griffin 2006, 55)

As I have argued and scholars on Herodotus’ ethnographic interests have well demonstrated, the complexity of the Greeks and others make it such that simple dichotomies break down repeatedly. Thus, Themistocles’ witty retort here brings out the fractured nature of Greek relations following the battle of Salamis.