Herodotus discusses two Persian leaders, Cambyses and Darius, for the entirety of Book Three of The Histories. These Persian kings, Darius the successor of Cambyses, represent “the other” because they are different from Herodotus himself, who more represents the every man. Also, the Kings were of Persia and Herodotus of Greece. Herodotus dedicates the greater part of Book Three to “the other” because opposing histories and stories are essential to support his original thesis. In Book One, Herodotus clearly states his thesis as such: “Herodotus of Halicarnassus here presents his research so that human events do not fade with time. May the great and wonderful deeds… as well as the causes that led them to make war on each other” (Herodotus, page 3). By stating this, he …show more content…
To accurately conclude why this war has begun, Herodotus must tell both sides of the story even when delivering this narrative to just the Athenians. It is essential to attempt to recall the information unbiasedly so that the conclusion reached is also unbiased. Although the opposition rulers were different in approaches to gaining the throne and reign over Persia, they both had the same conquest in mind: total and ultimate power. Although, this is not ever directly stated by Herodotus; nor are their overwhelming negative personality traits. For example, Cambyses is an impulsive evil king with no respect for the living or dead, “He ordered that the corpse be whipped, plucked of its hair, stabbed, and subjected to every other kind of outrage as well” (Herodotus, page 214). Herodotus later in the paragraph states the direct disturbances this act against the dead ordered by Cambyses conflicts with the Persian religion. A reader can gather rather unflattering adjectives regarding Cambyses while reading his narratives. Darius, equally malevolent, was clever and