Abstract Since the latter half of the twentieth century, many Western scholars have questioned the veracity of Herodotus’s historical record from the angle of writing style, narrative model, the use of sources, and purpose of writing. They further deny Herodotus’s identity as a historian and the continuity between classical historiography and modern historiography. In response to these many criticisms and challenges, many scholars have also written in defense of Herodotus’s reputation as a historian. This article is written in the context of these two strands of scholarly thought in Herodotean studies. The article tries to comprehensively evaluate, from an intellectual history perspective, the philosophical background in which Herodotus produced his works, his cultural context, his writing model, and narrative logic. The writing genre started by Herodotus was a new model of understanding for ancient Greeks substantially connected to later “historiography” in terms of its influence.

中文翻译：

---

关于希罗多德的“历史”如何成为“历史”

摘要自20世纪下半叶以来，许多西方学者从写作风格，叙事模式，资料来源和写作目的等方面对希罗多德的历史记录的真实性提出了质疑。他们进一步否认了希罗多德作为历史学家的身份以及古典史学和现代史学之间的连续性。为了应对这些批评和挑战，许多学者也写了捍卫希罗多德作为历史学家的名声的文章。本文是在希罗多德研究中这两个学术思想脉络中撰写的。本文试图从知识史的角度全面评估希罗多德斯创作作品的哲学背景，文化背景，写作模式和叙事逻辑。