342 Rosaria Vignolo Munson
The Question of Blood
An individual’s membership in an ethnic group represents a more or less explicit contract
between a person’s claims—his ethnic self-identity—and what the community or the
communities involved are willing to accept. Sometimes, when a specific advantage is at
stake, an official ratification of the contract becomes necessary on the basis of presumably
objective proofs. On December 13, 2011,The New York Timesreported on its first page
that several Indian tribes in California had disenrolled about 2,500 of their members
and were holding hearings on many more on the grounds of their not having the right
bloodline. Companies that test DNA, archival researchers, and officials from the Bureau
of Indian Affairs were mobilized for the purpose verifying tribal authenticity. Disenrolled
members have a lot to lose: access to tribal schools, housing subsidies, scholarships, and
other advantages financed by the flourishing casino industry.
In Herodotus, ethnicity becomes the object of an official hearing in the case of Alexan-
der of Macedonia (for another instance, at 2.18, see the following text). What was at
stake was participation in the Olympic games, a privilege reserved for Greeks. Alexander
documented his family’s Hellenic heritage to the satisfaction of the committee of Hellen-
odikai in charge of the festival, although it is not at all clear on what basis he did so, nor
do we have any independent evidence for the Olympic victory that Herodotus mentions
(Hall 2002: 154–6, Patterson 2010: 171). The way in which Herodotus frames the issue
is interesting, and the passage should be quoted in full (5.22.1–2):
That these who descend from Perdiccas are Greek, as they themselves say, I myself happen
tobelieve/know that it is so, and indeed Iwill show that they are Greek in laterlogoi(αυ’τóς
τεoυτω τυγχ ́’ ανώ επιστ, αμεν́ oςκα`ιδηκὰ `ιεν τ, o ̃ις
, ́
oπισθε λóγoισι
,
απoδεξώ
,
ως ε,ισ`ιEλληνες ́’ ),
and moreover the Hellenodikai who at Olympia administer the games recognized (’εγνωσαν ́ )
this to be the case. For when Alexander chose to compete and came down for that purpose,
those of the Greeks who were going to run against him tried to prevent him, saying that the
competition was not for barbarians but for Greek athletes. But after he showed (
,
απεδεξέ )
that he was an Argive, Alexander was judged (
,
εκρíθη) to be Greek and he proceeded to
compete in the foot race, tying for first place.The Olympic committee’s verdict amounts to a speech act: the officials have declared
the Macedonian kings Greek and therefore they are Greek, and the case is closed by law.
Herodotus’ discourse is here comparable to that which he employs when he identifies
Ephialtes as the traitor of Thermopylae on the basis of the judicial decision of another
panhellenic body, the Amphictyons of Delphi, who convicted Ephialtes and not any of the
other individuals who were plausibly named in conflicting reports (7.214.1). However,
there is a difference, because in the case of the Macedonian kings, Herodotus also says
that he is personally convinced (
,
επισταμεν́ oς) that they are Greek and promises to set
the case forth later on (5.22.1). The verb
,
απoδεξώ is part of Herodotus’ vocabulary of
proof (Thomas 2000: 163–212, 221–3), and promises that Herodotus will present some
evidence, presumably the same sort of evidence by which Alexander himself at Olympia
demonstrated (
,
απεδεξέ , 5.22.2) that he was Argive by blood.