#234 SC | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

malkaleh · 8 months ago

Text

20 questions for fic writers

I was tagged by @isagrimorie - thank you darling <3333.

1. How many works do you have on Ao3? 234

2. What's your total Ao3 word count? 364,199

3. What fandoms do you write for? Currently: The Tudors (TV), Shadow and Bone/Grishaverse, Tamora Pierce (largely Tortall at the moment but also Emelan), West Wing, Hunger Games (mostly in the form of a lot of Fandom AUs set in the Hunger Games) and Narnia. But I’ve written for a lot of others including Criminal Minds, Pundit RPF, Band of Brothers, Scarlet Pimpernel (1998), Spooks/MI5, The Hour, Doctor Who (Nu!Who) and Star Trek Discovery.

4. What are your top five fics by kudos?

Undertow (co-authored) (Criminal Minds, Rossi/Hotch) - The very short version: Dave gives Aaron a back-rub.

It’s not because of you (it’s because of me) (Ted Lasso, Jamie Tartt) - Brian Symonds was - fuck is one of the best youth talent coaches in the country it’s just he’s also been arrested and all Jamie can think is fuck (one take on Jamie’s backstory)

Five times out of many david rossi realised he was happily doomed (Criminal Minds, Rossi/Hotch) - Basically what it says on the tin. Five ways David Rossi knew that he was totally totally doomed in the best possible way in regards to the way he loved these kids

To dwell in enchantment (Criminal Minds, Rossi/Hotch) - It doesn't make the world any less messy, but it does make a balance, this family he has. David Rossi, coming home from work.

If i could go back (co-authored) (criminal minds/ncis/csi: ny, rossi/hotch) - It's the day of Derek's high school graduation, and Jason Gideon is standing at the bottom of the porch steps, trying not to hope.

5. Do you respond to comments? I do my absolute best (sometimes sadly spoons :/) but I appreciate every single one of my kind comments.

6. What is the fic you wrote with the angstiest ending?

I think it might be Hope Deferred Maketh Something which features Jason Gideon/Toby Ziegler, an apocalypse set in a diner in New York (I actually think the larger world is hopeful but these characters specific corner of the apocalypse is Very Much Not).

Oh no wait also In Pardoning That We Are Pardoned which is a Spooks fic in which a certain episode The Thing Is Real.

7. What's the fic you wrote with the happiest ending?

Hi Tudors OT3 Verse. Just in general. It’s not that there’s a conflict free path but it’s very very much a happy ending.

8. Do you get hate on fics? Very little but I have, yes and I will be honest it did get to me. And I am still working through it but moderating comments has helped a lot. And it was honestly barely anything compared to what so many people have to deal with.

9. Do you write smut? If so, what kind? Yes and also kind of no. I used to write it more and then uh, Trauma Brain. I can’t have sex because of CPTSD reasons and apparently writing sex is also triggering except sometimes the fictional people (or the fictional representations of fictional depictions of historical people) still do in fact have sex and so I write it. But it’s Weird (I think I do okay for never having had consensual sex though).

10. Do you write crossovers? What's the craziest one you've written? I think I actually write more fusion AUs than crossovers in some ways but I have in fact written a Sherlock-L&O: UK-Thick Of It-Pundit RPF-Modern Tudors-Criminal Minds Multiverse cc @bibliothekara

12. Have you ever had a fic translated? I was going to say I have but I actually don’t know/recall for sure so I’m going to say no. I have had podfic made of my fic though which is So Cool. (I would be delighted if anyone wanted to translate though).

13. Have you ever co-written a fic before? I have! Fantastic experience. Also just tossing AUs/ideas back and forth in general is So Much Fun and one thing I really loved about LJ fandom.

14. What's your all time favorite ship? I mean there’s Faramir/Eowyn my beloveds.

15. What's a WIP you want to finish but doubt you ever will? Into The Fire (The Tudors Scarlet Pimpernel AU). It’s going to get so dark and I’m not sure I actually want to go there because a bunch of people are going to die.

16. What are your writing strengths? Characters and like, description and emotion.

17. What are your writing weaknesses? Dialogue.

18. Thoughts on writing dialogue in another language in fic? I’d want to double check really carefully with someone who actually speaks the language in question (I’m currently checking about thou/thy formal versus intimate usage and that’s for English which I speak) before I did.

19. First fandom you wrote for? The first fandom I published fic for was The Bill. It was, perhaps not surprisingly angst and whump centric (before I knew what that was but) and may survive somewhere on the internet via the Wayback Machine.

20. Favorite fic you've written?

Several:

With Snow Far Below (Band of Brothers, Roe/Renee) - Renee thinks in terms of snow and chocolate

Monuments, Historical & Contemporary (Criminal Minds/Pundit RPF, ensemble) - How they could build statues and memorials and think that by paying homage after the fact, they were doing an honor.

I Am A Princess On The Way To My Throne (Skyfall 2012, Severine) -Severine. And the way it could have been (written because aspects of her story are mine and I unashamedly wanted a different ending for her)

Such A Time As This (Tudors, Anne Boleyn) - "You have come to your royal position for such a time as this" or a retelling of the story of Queen Esther with Anne Boleyn as a Mizrahi Jewish lady.

We Rise Together (TWW, CJ Cregg) - CJ was kidnapped, not Zoey.

Once I Fall In Love (It’s Forever) (Kushiels Legacy, Phedre and Delaunay) - She loved him as she did me. The realisation had come suddenly, a shock [AU mini fic for Kushiel's Dart]

Karma Is My Family (Grishaverse, Inej) - Inej smiles at her friends who are her family, warm and full of love. Smiles at her husband, who has never possessed her or owned her - has never thought of their love that way - only as two hearts shared. [Inej and her power, her kindness, her love and the way karma comes for Tante Heleen]

Rewrite The Stars (Tudors, Anne/Henry/Thomas) - In another world this is how it might have gone between the three of them. The story of how the love between three extraordinary people change the world for the better and made it the kindest. The story of a fight for a fairytale. [An expanded version of the Tudors OT3 verse fic Rewrite The Stars]

Tagging: If you want to (and if you want to do consider yourself tagged): @bessemerprocess @endoftheworldhere @unseenacademic @emilykaldwen @shes-a-voodoo-child @onekisstotakewithme @claudiajcregg @holy-ships-x-red-lips @quillington @theladyelizabeth @naurielrochnur @eidetictelekinetic @dr-dendritic-trees @boleynecklace @nocompromise-noregrets @herawell @sarking

#meme

11 notes · View notes

nbula-rising · 4 months ago

Text

Viola Pineapple Crochet Maxi Skirt Time: Weekend Project

Size: Small (Medium, Large, 1X, 2X, 3X), instructions written in size small with changes for larger sizes in parentheses.

Finished waist Size 36 (40, 44, 48, 52, 55)” to fit waist 26 (30, 34, 38, 42, 45)”

Shown in size Small. 32” long

Gauge: 16 sts and 8 rows = 4” [10 cm] in double crochet rows after blocking.

Materials

Light weight yarn Yarn: Universal Yarn “Bamboo Pop” (50% Cotton, 50% Bamboo; 292 yards [266 meters]/100 grams): #138 Quartz – 4 (5, 6, 7, 9, 10) balls,

Hook: US size 7 (4.5 mm)

Notions: Stitch Markers

Special Stitches

4 double crochet Open Shell stitch (Shl): (2 dc, ch 2, 2 dc) in indicated stitch or space.

Expanded Shell stitch (ExpShl): ({2 dc, ch 1} 2 times, 2 dc) in indicated stitch or space.

Skinny 4 double crochet Shell (SkShl): (2 dc, ch 1, 2 dc) in indicated stitch or space.

Pattern Notes

This pattern is worked in the round from the top down with increases for upper skirt shaping.

Dc rounds are started with a modified turning chain, a single crochet is worked without a ch-1 turning chain, followed by 2 chains to create the height needed for dc. When working the next round the top of the ch-2 is worked as the top of a regular dc st.

To make the skirt longer add rounds without increases between the increase rounds (for a shorter skirt, subtract rounds without increases between the increase rounds. The last round of the upper skirt needs to have a number of stitches divisible by 14 for the lace pattern set-up.

Drawstring for the skirt is a Crocheted Romanian Cord. If you need help there is a great video on Stitches n Scraps YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vniz9CAREVs Pattern Upper Skirt

Ch 145 (161, 177, 193, 209, 221).

Rnd 1: Turn, sc in back bump of second ch from hook and each ch back to start, without twisting sl st to first sc to join in Rnd. (144 (160,176, 192, 208, 220) sc)

Rnd 2: Turn, sc in first st, ch 3 {counts as first dc and ch-1 sp}, *sk 1, dc in next st, ch 1, repeat from * to end of Rnd, join with sl st to 2nd ch of first ch-3.

(72 (80, 88, 96,104,110) dc, 72 (80, 88, 96,104,110) ch-1 sp)

Rnd 3: Turn, sc in first ch-1 sp, ch 2 {counts as first dc here and throughout}, *dc in next st, dc in next ch-1 sp, repeat from * to end of Rnd, join with sl st to 2nd ch of first ch-2.

(144 (160,176,192, 208, 220) dc)

Rnd 4: Turn, sc in first st, ch 2, dc in each st around, join with sl st to 2nd ch of first ch-2. Upper Skirt Increases

Place increase stitch markers according to size (6 markers each size).

Place marker in stitch number:

Small: 12, 36, 60, 84, 108, 132

Medium: 14, 40, 67, 93, 120, 146

Large: 15, 44, 74, 103, 132, 161

XL: 16, 48, 80, 112, 144, 176

2X: 17, 52, 86, 122, 156, 191

3X: 19, 56, 93, 127, 164, 201

Rnd 5: Turn, sc in first st, ch 2, *dc in each st until reach marked st, 2 dc in marked st, move st marker to first st made, Rep from * until used all st markers, dc in each st remaining until reach end of rnd, join with sl st to 2nd ch of first ch-2.

(150 (166,182,198, 214, 226) dc)

Rnds 6-8: Repeat Rnd 4, moving st marker up to st worked in marked st.

Rnds 9 – 36 (36, 20, 20, 16, 16): Repeat Rnds 5-8. (192 (208, 200, 216, 226, 238) dc)

Size Sm: After Rnd 36, remove 2nd and 5th Increase markers, go to instructions for Rnd 37.

Size Med: After Rnd 36, remove 1st, 3rd, 4th and 6th Increase markers, go to instructions for Rnd 37.

Rnd x (x, 21, 21, 17, 17): Rep Rnd 5. (x (x, 206, 222, 232, 244) dc)

Rnds x (x, 22, 22, 18, 18) – x (x, 25, 25, 21, 21): Rep Rnd 4.

Rnds x (x, 26, 26, 22, 22) – x (x, 35, 35, 36, 36): Rep Rnds x (x, 21, 21, 17, 17) – x (x, 25, 25, 21, 21). (x (x, 218, 234, 250, 262) dc)

Size XL: After Rnd 35 remove 2nd and 5th Increase Markers.

Size 2X: After Rnd 36 remove 1st, 3rd, 4th and 6th Increase Markers.

Size 3X: After Rnd 36 remove 2nd and 5th Increase Markers

Rnd 37 (37, 36, 36, 37, 37): Rep Rnd 5. Remove any remaining Increase Markers.

(196 (210, 224, 238, 252, 266) dc)

Rnd 38 (38, 37, 37, 38, 38) – x (x, 38, 39, 40, 41): Rep Rnd 4. Pineapple Border

14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Lace Repeats

Rnd 1: Turn, (ch 3, dc) in same st as join, [ch 4, sk 4 sts, sc in next st, ch 6, sk 3 sts, sc in next st, ch 4, skip 4 sts, Shl in next st] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same st as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-4 sp, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) ch-6 sp, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) sc)

Rnd 2: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 1, 9 Tr in next ch-6 sp, ch 1, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl,

28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-1 sp, 126 (135, 144, 153, 162, 171) Tr)

Rnd 3: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 2, (sc in next Tr, ch 3, sk 1 st) 4 times, sc in next Tr, ch 2, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl.

(14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-2 sp, 56 (60, 64, 68, 72, 76) ch-3 sp,

70 (75, 80, 85, 90, 95) sc)

Rnd 4: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 3, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 3 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 70 (75, 80, 85, 90, 95) ch-3 sp, 56 (60, 64, 68, 72, 76) sc)

Rnd 5: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 4, sk next ch-3 sp, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 2 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 4, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-4 sp, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-3 sp, 42 (45, 48, 51, 54, 57) sc)

Rnd 6: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 5, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 5, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl.

(14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-5 sp, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) ch-3 sp,

28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) sc)

Rnd 7: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 6, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 6, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl,

28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-6 sp, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) sc)

Rnd 8: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 4, sc in next ch-6 sp, ch 6, sc in next ch-6 sp, ch 4, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl.

(14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-4 sp, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) ch-6 sp,

28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) sc)

Rnds 9 – 15: Rep Rnd 2 – 8.

Rnd 16: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 2, sc in next ch-4 sp, 9 dc in next ch-6 sp, sc in next ch-4 sp, ch 2, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-2 sp, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) sc,

126 (135, 144, 153, 162, 171) dc)

Rnd 17: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [*sk ch-2 sp, (ch 1, dc in next dc) 9 times, ch 1, * Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl.

(14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 140 (150, 160, 170, 180, 190) ch-1 sp,

126 (135, 144, 153, 162, 171) dc)

Rnd 18: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 2, sk first ch-1 sp (sc in next ch-1 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 7 times, sc in next ch-1 sp, ch 2, sk next ch-1 sp, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-2 sp,

112 (120, 128, 136, 144, 152) sc, 98 (105, 112, 119, 126, 133) ch-3 sp)

Rnd 19: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 3, sk ch-2 sp, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 6 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 112 (120, 128, 136, 144, 152) ch-3 sp,

98 (105, 112, 119, 126, 133) sc)

Rnd 20: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 3, sk next ch-3 sp, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 5 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, Shl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 2, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first Shl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) Shl, 98 (105, 112, 119, 126, 133) ch-3 sp,

84 (90, 96, 102, 108, 114) sc)

Rnd 21: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-2 sp of first Shl, [ch 3, sk next ch-3 sp, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 4 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, ExpShl in ch-2 sp of next Shl] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, SkShl in same ch-2 sp as first dc, ch 1, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first ExpShl. (14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) ExpShl, 98 (105, 112, 119, 126, 133) ch-3 sp, 84 (90, 96, 102, 108, 114) sc)

Rnd 22: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in first ch-1 sp of first ExpShl, ch 1, SkShl in 2nd ch-1 sp of same ExpShl, [ch 3, sk next ch-3 sp, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 3 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, SkShl in first ch-1 sp of next ExpShl, ch 1, SkShl in 2nd ch-1 sp of same ExpShl]

13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-1 sp as first dc, ch 1, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first SkShl. 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) SkShl, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) ch-1 sp, 70 (75, 80, 85, 90, 95) ch-3 sp, 56 (60, 64, 68, 72, 78) sc)

Rnd 23: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-1 sp of first SkShl, [ch 3, sk next ch-3 sp, (sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st) 2 times, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, SkShl in each of next 3 ch-1 sps] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, SkShl in each of next 2 ch-1 sps, 2 dc in same ch-1 sp as first dc, ch 1, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first SkShl.

(42 (45, 48, 51, 54, 57) SkShl, 56 (60, 64, 68, 72, 78) ch-3 sp, 42 (45, 48, 51, 54, 57) sc)

Rnd 24: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-1 sp of first SkShl, (ch 2, SkShl in next ch-1 sp) 2 times, [ch 3, sk next ch-3 sp, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, sk 1 st, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, (SkShl in next ch-1 sp, ch 2) 2 times, Sk Shl in next ch-1 sp] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-1 sp as first dc, ch 1, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first SkShl.

(42 (45, 48, 51, 54, 57) SkShl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-2 sp, 42 (45, 48, 51, 54, 57) ch-3 sp, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) sc)

Rnd 25: Turn, (loose sl st, ch 3, dc) in ch-1 sp of same SkShl, [ch 3, sk next ch-3 sp, sc in next ch-3 sp, ch 3, ch 3, (SkShl in next ch-1 sp, ch 2, ExpShl in next ch-1 sp, ch 2, SkShl in next ch-1 sp] 13 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18) times, Rep from * to * once, 2 dc in same ch-1 sp as first dc, ch 1, sl st to 3rd ch of first ch-3, completes first SkShl.

(28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) SkShl, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) ExpShl, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-3 sp, 28 (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) ch-2 sp, 14 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19) sc)

Rnd 26: Turn, ch 1, sc in same ch-1 sp as join, *ch 3, sc in next ch-sp, Rep from * around

until no ch-sps remain unworked, ch 3, join with sl st to first sc of Rnd. Fasten off. (112 (120, 128, 136, 144, 152) ch-3 sp, 112 (120, 128, 136, 144, 152) sc) Drawstring

Row 1: Ch 2, sc in 2nd ch from hook.

Row 2: Turn, sc in side loop of 2nd ch from first ch-2.

Row 3: Turn, sc in the 2 side loops of previous sc.

Rep Row 3 until cord is 51 (55, 59, 63, 67, 70) inches long. Finishing

Gently block, weave in any remaining tails.

Starting in center front of waistband, weave drawstring in and out of openings along waistband. Tie knots in ends of drawstring and trim any excess from ends.

#crochet #skirt

2 notes · View notes

aboutanancientenquiry · 1 year ago

Text

Another review of the book of Christopher Pelling Herodotus and the Question Why

"2021

Review of "Herodotus and the Question Why," written by Christopher Pelling

Joel A. Schlosser

Christopher Pelling, (2019) Herodotus and the Question Why. Austin: University of Texas Press. xv + 360 pp. $55.00. ISBN 9781477318324 (hbk).

‘Does Herodotus think democracy a good thing?’ Christopher Pelling asks toward the end of his erudite and wide-ranging Herodotus and the Question Why. ‘The answer surely will be “yes and no”’ (p. 234). Freedom and democracy often lead to disturbing consequences as well as inspiring ones; Herodotus praises nothing without also revealing, sometimes subtly, its potential downsides. Strengths and weaknesses go closely together, both building and then imperiling greatness. Herodotus’ ability to hold these opposing interpretations together is not, Pelling asserts, an incoherence of thought. It is just a paradox.

Summoning many decades of inquiries into Herodotus (and citing 35 of his own articles, chapters, and books on the subject), Pelling centers the work of explanation in his study of Herodotus. Explanation appears as one of the motivations for the Histories themselves, which Herodotus describes (in Pelling’s translation) as ‘why they [sc. the Greeks and the barbarians] came to war with one another’ (p. 22). Explanation hopes to ‘make something more understandable’ (p. 5) and Pelling untangles the many skeins of explanation that Herodotus offers in the early books of the Histories: aiti- words that focus on blameworthiness or charges of malfeasance; prophasis, which Herodotus uses like Thucydides to describe an explanatory account put forward by an interested party; and proschêma, which describes a pretext or rationalization––not the true cause but a supposed one. Herodotus also employs stories for the sake of explanation, letting audiences draw their own inferences from recurrent patterns or suggestive narratives. Explanation, Pelling observes, ‘is a game for two’: explanatory success depends on an audience’s uptake. Herodotus’ preferred modes of explanation say a lot about who he took his audience to be and his variety of explanatory strategies suggests the different forms of persuasion current in his day.

But explanation comes with closure, and Herodotus’ Histories seem to resist closure at every turn. Herodotus and the Question Why expands the very idea of explanation early in its argument, opening it like a folded envelope to reveal the letter within. Herodotus does not just explain; he shows his readers how you could possibly know anything. He shows his own ‘rethinking in stride’ (p. 93)––one wonderful formulation among many in this volume––reworking patterns and complicating seemingly simply explanations as he goes. Pelling sees an affinity here with the Hippocratics, who developed ‘corroborative argument’ (p. 88) as well as such revisions, either finding support for initial hypotheses or revising their hypotheses when they discovered contrary evidence. Herodotus, for example, begins his description of the Egyptians by asserting that their way of life inverts that of the Greeks. ‘When the topsy-turvy idea returns’, Pelling writes, Herodotus has revised the ‘attention-grabbing initial strong proposition’ (p. 90), writing that the Egyptians ‘avoid using Greek customs and, so to speak, those of any other peoples’ (2.91), a phrase that leaves the possibility of similarities open.

As the narrative of the Histories unfurls, the predictability that explanations would seem to promise––e.g. that x phenomenon will lead to y consequence––becomes less clear cut. Aitia begins to appear ambiguous. Herodotus’ language of wonders (thômata) reflects his increasing awareness of unpredictable and inexplicable phenomena in the world he encounters. Modern historians worry about overdetermined events––what social scientists call ‘endogeneity problems’––but the language of wonder often evokes the opposite: underdetermined phenomena that seem enormously important yet stun and bemuse the inquirer. Wonders are things and events that resist explanation.

When Pelling turns to the actual sequence of events of the Histories––which he loosely follows in the latter two-thirds of the book––these framing thoughts on explanation allow for an expansive expatiation of Herodotus’ stories. While many interpretations leap on the pattern of expansionism and self-destruction that begins in Book I and shapes the narrative of the Persians’ invasions in the books that follow, Pelling sounds the many dissonant notes to this over-simple account. For one, the Greeks do a lot to bring the war with the Persians on themselves––meddling at the court, caring more about their own petty factionalism, and being sucked into aggressive behavior, such as when the Athenians are persuaded by Aristagoras to join the Ionian revolt from Persian control (5.97). More broadly, claims about blame and vengeance are ‘displaced from their natural place and placed in mouths where they ring false’ (p. 127). The stories of the Persians raise questions about how much they really differ from their Greek enemies. These stories are redolent with an ‘un-Greek’ atmosphere, yet while Cambyses behaves with ‘brutal insensitivity’, when Darius later asks Indians and Greeks about how they would treat the bodies of their dead fathers, the Greeks’ horror at the Indians’ response––that they would eat them––resembles Cambyses’ prejudicial judgment, while Darius exemplifies open-minded understanding.

Pelling’s own sensitivity to nuance and paradox in the Histories culminates in his approach to the treatment of the Greeks’ victory and especially the tendency among many readers of Herodotus to explain the triumph as one of Greek values––embodied by democracy or freedom or ‘civilization’––over Persian ones. Pelling grants that this story has some basis in Herodotus – Herodotus comments that isêgoria in Athens prompted her rise to greatness (5.78), and the Spartan Demaratus explains that it is the nomos of freedom that empowers the Greeks to fight (7.104). There are reasons to believe the Greeks’ triumph was of their own making. Pelling impersonates these moments of Greek pride when he asks: ‘Aren’t we simply better than them, and isn’t that explanation enough?’ (p. 167)

Such a rhetorical question may have satisfied many of Herodotus’ early auditors, but it did not stop Herodotus from further inquiry. For one, Herodotus’ sense of contingency qualifies any explanation: ‘Time and again, it could easily have been different’, Pelling observes (p. 167). Even with this qualification, no single explanatory variable––such as the Greeks’ being ‘better’––can suffice. In a rather un-Herodotean systematic survey, Pelling lays out the inadequacy of any simple explanation for the Greek victory: neither the gods nor ‘Greek values’ nor Greek strategies and tactics nor freedom nor democracy provides sufficient explanation. Unlike Thucydides, Herodotus does not appear interested in adducing a single set of causes. Peeling back the layers of Herodotus’ explanations, one never reaches the pith.

Yet each layer of explanation is distinct from the others. In this way, Herodotus is helpful for resisting the modern tendency toward conflating democracy and freedom. On his account, the Persians are free, but so are the Spartans, the Scythians, and the Athenians. Yet among these, only the Athenians have a democracy––and their democracy does not exist for the entirety of the Histories. Freedom may provide the rallying cry for the allied Greeks against the Persian invasion, but Herodotus has already staged a similar moment when Cyrus rallies the Persians against the Lydians on the grounds of freedom [my aboutanancientenquiry's remark: this is obviously a lapsus and the author means the Medes of Astyages, as it becomes clear later in the text]. Democracy is not necessary for freedom.

Nor is democracy sufficient for freedom. Democracy does play a powerful role at certain moments of the Histories, but its influence can also lead to ambivalent consequences. Pelling points out how democratic slogans in Ionia prompted revolts that then laid the groundwork for new forms of tyranny. The equal speaking for which democracy became notorious could get out of hand. Pelling describes how the Greek debate before the Battle of Salamis was a mess, a ‘great pushing and shoving of words’ during which Herodotus shows, on Pelling’s reading, that ‘the Greeks are wasting their bellicosity’ with endless vociferation (p. 184).

Demokratia, for which Herodotus is the earliest source, was not yet a laudatory word in the late 5th century when Herodotus was composing his inquiries. Herodotus often employs periphrastics such as the series of iso- related words––isonomia, isokratia, and isêgoria––that surface from the mouths of quite unlikely sources (like Otanes, the Persian nobleman) as well as quite undemocratic regimes (like the Spartans and the Corinthians). Pelling notes that isonomia is ‘never used pejoratively’, perhaps suggesting Herodotus’ affinities with the tyrant-slayers Aristogeiton and Harmodius who ‘made Athens isonomoi’ (p. 194). Yet while democracy ‘glistens’ for modern readers (p. 195), Herodotus does not shirk from casting shade.

Pelling casts doubt on a reading of Herodotus that celebrates the triumph of the people (dêmos). More often than he speaks of the dêmos, Herodotus describes groups of people––the Athenians, the Spartans, and the Persians. Yet even more often than this, Herodotus focuses his narrative on what Pelling calls the ‘big man antagonisms’, the vying of leaders of these groups of people. ‘It is as a tool’ of such antagonisms, Pelling asserts, ‘that the dêmos comes into play with Cleisthenes’ (p. 196). Cleisthenes’ engagement with Isagoras led him to ‘recruit the dêmos to his faction’ (translating Herodotus 5.66.2). The Spartans later complain of the ‘ungrateful demos’ (5.91) that threw off their protection, but as Pelling points out, the subsequent debate concerns not democracy but the broader conflict between tyranny and freedom.

Democracy, according to Pelling, ‘allows for a prism for seeing freedom pushed to the limit’, functioning as an inverse image of tyranny as a prism for seeing people ‘at the mercy of unrestrained power’ (p. 197). Here I wonder if Pelling too quickly assimilates the democracy of the Athenians with democracy in general and loses Herodotus’ appreciation for the wide variety of ways in which the people can create and lose power. Take, for example, the episode when Cyrus leads the Persians to revolt against Astyages. Pelling mentions the passage where Herodotus describes how ‘they’––the Persians––‘cast off the yoke of slavery and became free men’ (1.95), but he places this in the larger context of ‘big man’ accomplishments. I would instead interpret Herodotus here as anticipating his description of the strength of the Athenians, whose liberation was also a collective act (5.78). When Cyrus later calls on the Persians to free themselves from slavery, Herodotus relates how ‘they enthusiastically went about gaining their independence’ (1.128). Yes, Darius’ father Hystaspes describes Cyrus as having made the Persians free, but this does not come in the narrator’s own voice. So too with Darius’ later argument that disavows the importance of the dêmos for freeing the Persians. When Herodotus describes the event independent of a particular character, it has much more of a popular flavor. The Persians themselves act as rulers; they affirm their power to create their freedom.

Athenian democracy may not be as ‘special’ (p. 207) for Herodotus as 21st century readers, myself included, tend to make it, but Pelling’s insistence on this point risks glossing the nuances among different formations of collective power that appear across the Histories. Dêmokratia, as Pelling points out, does not receive systematic treatment by Herodotus. Tyranny and freedom, however, do. I would suggest that Herodotus’ attention to how different peoples create, sustain, and fail to maintain collective power through nomoi illuminates an underlying counterpoint to the ‘big man’ narratives he also loves to tell. Winning freedom may depend on a leader, but its sustenance requires that the collective wean itself from such dependence. Themistocles gives good advice about how the ‘wall of wood’ refers to a fleet ready for battle at sea, but the Athenians decide to follow this advice. The collectivity holds the power and they are, after all, the ones who win the battle itself.

That said, the paradox to which Pelling returns readers of the Histories remains: Herodotus proposes no definitive set of nomoi––culture, customs, or laws––that can guarantee the perdurance of freedom won by collective power. So ‘yes and no’ to democracy but also ‘yes and no’ to Spartan isokratia or Ionian isonomia. And ‘yes and no’ to each of the politeiai that Herodotus introduces across the course of his inquiry. As Pelling demonstrates, Herodotus brings readers to appreciate this paradox through his wonderful summoning of myriad causes, explanations, stories, and human and nonhuman actors. By doing so, Herodotus equips us to understand and appreciate the dynamic nature of things, illuminating the reasons for both ‘yes’ and ‘no’. Herodotus and the Question Why opens such a reading of Herodotus with skill and intelligence. About the book, then, one can declare with confidence a resounding ‘yes’.

Joel Alden Schlosser Bryn Mawr College [email protected]"

#herodotus #the histories #christopher pelling #joel alden schlosser #historical causation

6 notes · View notes