Heroic Self-Mutilation in Herodotus’ Histories

Derek H. Smith (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill)

Most instances of bodily mutilation in the Histories can be placed into two categories: ritual mutilation committed voluntarily by cultural groups to mark a significant moment, or acts of violent disfigurement inflicted on others by their superiors as revenge or punishment. The latter type has garnered much academic interest: scholars such as Edith Hall (1989) and Susan Shapiro (2000) have concentrated on instances of mutilation committed by Eastern despots against their subjects and have argued that Herodotus views violent disfigurement as a distinctly non-Greek practice (as the Spartan Pausanias claims in 9.79). There is, however, a third type of mutilation that does not fit into either of these categories and has not received much critical attention: the practice of self-mutilation (or mutilation of one’s own kin) as a means of subverting political authority and gaining personal advantage.

In this paper I will examine three examples of this type of mutilation: the contest of wits between the thief and King Rhampsinitus in 2.121, Zopyrus’ infiltration of Babylon in 3.153-160, and Hegesistratus’ escape from the Spartan prison in 9.37. Despite the ethnic differences between the protagonists, these episodes share a similar narrative pattern: initial crisis, resolution through a trick involving self-mutilation, awestruck reaction from others (especially from rivals), and material and political success for the mutilator. In these accounts, Herodotus highlights personal qualities of the mutilator that match or exceed those of their rivals: the thief proves himself to be wisest (πλεῖστα ἐπιστάμενος) of the Egyptians, beyond even Rhampsinitus (2.121 z); Zopyrus succeeds in infiltrating Babylon through his cleverness and resolution, qualities that Darius demonstrates earlier when assuming the throne but cannot effectively exploit against the Babylonians; although Hegesistratus’ captors, the Spartans, are reknowned for their courage, Herodotus calls his escape the boldest deed ever done (ἀνδρηιότατον ἔργον πάντων τῶν ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν, 9.37). In these accounts, Herodotus portrays mutilation neither as a culturally specific νόμος nor as cruel retribution enacted by tyrants, but rather he reveals how a cunning and resolute character, whether Greek or non-Greek, can attain his goals and outstrip his superiors through the extreme gesture of self-mutilation.