Introduction

Abstract This chapter examines why the essay On the Malice of Herodotus is an important contribution to the study of Greco-Roman historiography, despite the fact that previous scholars have approached the work mostly in a negative or critical way. It is argued here that the work is best understood as partaking of several genres, including especially that of historiographical criticism. A survey of criticism of Herodotus from the fifth century bce to Plutarch’s era is followed by an examination of Plutarch’s place in that tradition. Plutarch largely ignores earlier criticisms of Herodotus which focussed on his inaccuracies and tall tales, and instead argues that Herodotus’ malicious disposition caused him to minimize the great achievements of the Greeks, to invent some episodes wholesale, to ignore important actions, and to concentrate on the quarrels and differences of the Greeks rather than emphasize the largely cooperative nature of the Greek victory over Persia.