Herostratus

Life

Little is known about Herostratus. His identity "is shrouded in mystery except for the name that history attributes to him", remarks the historian Albert Borowitz. Details of his family, date of birth, residence, profession, and place in society have not been found. It is sometimes assumed that he was a citizen of Ephesus, located near the modern town of Selçuk, Turkey, but this remains uncertain. Furthermore, some historians have suggested that Herostratus was non-Ephesian by birth or a slave (or former slave), since the fatal punishment he was administered was typically reserved for noncitizens. Some, in fact, suspect he belonged to a low social standing.

Burning the Temple

The Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, dedicated to the goddess of childbirth and the hunt, among other things, was a product of competition with the rival city Samos. Designed by Chersiphron and Metagenes and built over the course of 120 years starting around 560 BCE, it stood at double the size of the Parthenon, according to Pliny the Elder's measurements. It was made almost entirely of marble, save for, for instance, the wooden statue of Artemis and the roof. Ancient sources listed the temple as one of the seven wonders of the world. Philo of Byzantium deemed it "the only house of the gods," and Pliny crowned it "the most wonderful monument of Græcian magnificence".

In 356 BCE, on the day Alexander the Great was born, a man burned down the temple. Sources such as Jordanes note that he set its large wooden roof ablaze. The crime was attributed to a "nobody" named Herostratus. Promptly arrested, he was tortured to death on the rack, where he confessed to having committed the arson to secure everlasting fame or notoriety. To thwart his ambition as well as to sharpen his punishment, Ephesus passed a damnatio memoriae law forbidding any mention of his name. The arson shocked and grieved the city and may have pushed it to the brink of a panic.

However, there might be gaps in this account. One such gap, observes Borowitz, is that Herostratus professed his vainglorious motives under torture instead of "[crying] his name ... to all who would listen". Torture was often not considered a means of obtaining information. Furthermore, Ephesians may have suspected that Herostratus' true intention remained concealed, for instance, in the event that enemies of Ephesus had hired him to burn the temple.

The temple was rebuilt starting in 323 BC, which produced an even larger structure than before. The Goths eventually looted and burned it , and the temple met its end in 401 CE when a Christian mob destroyed it. Today, a reassembled solitary column remains standing.

Motives

There is no evidence pointing toward Herostratus' motives. While ancient sources agree that he burned the temple to acquire fame, why he sought this fame is uncertain. However, the prevailing theory since antiquity is that resentment at a perceived injustice, that he lacked the means to achieve a favorable reputation, fuelled the act. The Greek satirist Lucian proposed, for the first time, that a sense of jealousy or mediocrity motivated Herostratus; he was unable to become famous in any way other than by burning the Artemision. According to the Russian poet Semyon Nadson, Herostratus had acknowledged that he was a "maggot squashed by destiny, in the midst of the countless hordes". Conversely, the Roman historian Valerius Maximus notes Herostratus' penchant for sacrilege as a factor.

Transmission and historical interpretation

The damnatio memoriae law proved futile, as numerous ancient writers documented Herostratus' name. Theopompus, a Chian historian and contemporary of the arson, was the first; he mentions him in the Philippica. Strabo noted Herostratus as the man who burned the Temple of Artemis in the Geographica three centuries later. In a segment titled "Of Appetite for Glory", Valerius Maximus brings up the example of Herostratus to demonstrate quests for fame that resort to crime alongside that of Pausanias, who assassinated Philip II of Macedon. His essay was the first to juxtapose Herostratus with a criminal hunt for fame. Around the second century CE, the Greek satirist Lucian indicated the arson in relation with a later violent act, namely, Peregrinus' self-immolation at the Olympics.

By the Middle Ages, Herostratus had become a familiar name in Europe. Several writers, such as Geoffrey Chaucer, alluded to him, whom they generally treated as an "[embodiment of] the pursuit of celebrity at any cost." They also stressed that "negative fame often outlasts glory achieved by merit." Invoking the arsonist, the protagonist Juan Ruiz de Alarcón's 1630 comedy La verdad sospechosa (The Suspicious Truth), Don García, reasons that having a low public profile renders one an "animal" and that fame must be sought after by any means necessary. In his 1699 play Richard III, Colley Cibber portrays the English king as fame-thirsty and eager to define himself even through abnormal methods, and thus he recalls the story of Herostratus: "Th'aspiring Youth, that fir'd the Ephesian dome, / Outlives, in Fame, the pious Fool that rais'd it." Beyond literature, an oral tradition revolving around him arose.

Starting from the Renaissance, Herostratus was a commonplace metonym for someone accused of ruthlessness. For instance, the satirist Gabriel Harvey wrote in the late sixteenth century an attack on another author, Robert Greene, likening his libellous actions to the burning of the Artemision. Thomas Jefferson was also derided as Herostratic. Following the Louisiana Purchase, he fantasized about grand salt deposits on the Missouri River, which one writer understood as a dream of glory similar to Herostratus'.

Nineteenth-century literature, writes Borowitz, commenced "the still ongoing process of converting Herostratos from a symbol of destructiveness into a richly imagined personage". Differing from ancient sources, some modern authors supply their account of Herostratus' arson with a background and context. While most rebuke his crime, some indirectly romanticize or abate it by highlighting his imagined obscurity and dejection. The Enlightenment writer Alessandro Verri published the first book-length fictional narrative on Herostratus in 1815, La Vita di Erostrato (The Life of Herostratus). It tells the tale of a man seeking glory who, after constantly having his dreams shattered in failure, grows frustrated and burns the Temple of Artemis. On the other hand, Romantic and exoticist poetry tends to focus on Herostratus' supposed "joy in destruction or self-destruction" rather than his hunger for fame.

Herostratus' legacy has persisted in the 20th and 21st centuries. Jean-Paul Sartre's short story "Erostratus" concerns Paul Hilbert, who desires to become a "black hero" in the vein of Herostratus but fails due to his personal weakness. The 1967 film Herostratus, a critique of "an advertising-saturated society that exploited rather than empowered young people," molds the historical figure and event into a tale addressing 1960s society. The forlorn protagonist plans to kill himself, but before doing so, he arranges to make his suicide a media spectacle, until he changes his mind. A recent adaptation of Herostratus' arson, Philipe Arnauld's 2002 La boite à chagrins (Pandora's Box), foregrounds the relevance of mass media and the internet. A serial killer who goes by Herostratus intends to publish images of his murders on the internet until a detective catches him in a trap.

Analysis and social legacy

Herostratus' name has become a term for someone who commits a crime to achieve notoriety or self-glorification, and Herostratic fame refers to "fame [sought] at any cost." According to writer Julia H. Fawcett, he "exemplifies a figure asserting his right to self-definition, one who strikes out against a history to which he is unknown by performing himself back into that history—through whatever means necessary".

Herostratus is sometimes considered the first terrorist. Modern terrorists, notes Albert Borowitz, tend to follow his example, hankering for publicity and aspiring to overcome perceived injustice. Such injustice may be deeply personal and rooted in a diminished sense of meaning or self-worth; being unloved or confined to an "[intolerably] meaningless" existence are possible factors, according to James W. Clarke's analysis of assassins. Many, like Herostratus, are not ideologically or politically committed, while others are, though, at the same time, devoted to fame. This can lead them to shun their claimed objectives, as seen when the jihadist Mohammed Merah murdered three Muslim soldiers in 2012. Modern acts of terror often forge an appearance of senselessness.

The Herostratic criminal targets a publicly valued symbol, an important person, or multiple people. Valerius Maximus indicates that they thrive on "[absorbing] the celebrity of [their] prey." To harness this celebrity, in scholars' view, media coverage is required, such that the anti-technology terrorist Ted Kaczynski pledged to halt his bombing campaign if The New York Times and Washington Post published his manifesto. Driven by an urge to appear in the newspapers and, to a far lesser extent, his anarchistic leanings, Luigi Lucheni assassinated the Austrian empress Elisabeth, and during the trial that followed, he acted theatrically and vaingloriously and "blew star's kisses to the audience." The attorney general made the case for casting his name into "eternal oblivion." Similarly, Arthur Bremer, desperate for stardom, shot Alabama governor George Wallace in 1972. To him, the choice of victim depended on how much coverage he thought their assassination would garner. These Herostratic criminals all suffered a troubled past; Lucheni writes that his childhood was deprived of love, and Kaczynski, among other things, faced academic pressure from his parents and trauma from a harrowing college experiment.

In the wake of the September 11 attacks, numerous writers brought up Herostratus' name. The destruction of the World Trade Center, an "[icon] of [the United States]' might", was interpreted as a venture for immortality akin to the Artemision's demolition. Osama bin Laden, in fact, recorded a video of himself celebrating the terrorist attacks, which Borowitz regards as a tool of self-aggrandizement. A contemporary commentator wrote, "[The] highlighting of terrorism in mass media is a trigger for the Herostratus phenomenon. Every showing of a shop's explosion, mass murder and falling skyscrapers gives birth to more and more terrorists." The arson has also been paralleled with the Taliban's destruction of Buddhas in Afghanistan.

Such criminals who "perpetrate odious attacks for the sake of infamy", in the words of the scholars Jean-Paul Azam and Mario Ferrero, are consumed by the so-called Herostratus syndrome. Borowitz lays out seven elements constituting the syndrome:

• An appetite for enduring and widespread fame or notoriety to promote a personal sense of power
• Intending to spark public "panic, distress, insecurity, or loss of confidence"
• Targeting a famous person, property, or institution
• Jealousy toward successful people caused by "loneliness, alienation, mediocrity, and failure"
• Self-destructive behavior after or during the crime's course
• Sacrilege or iconoclasm
• Other motives, such as those ideological Mental insanity does not necessarily figure in the syndrome, he argues. Instead, someone like Herostratus may perpetrate a criminal act simply because they feel that life has been unfair to them. Neither is it the case that Herostratic criminals must have psychological or pathological features distinguishing them from others.

The philosopher Geoffrey Scarre considers the case of Herostratus to discuss whether posthumous events can render one's life more significant. While he notes that his ambition, to secure fame, came into fruition and thus his "meaningless life" was seemingly made "meaningful", Scarre concludes that the arson did not in fact enrich Herostratus' life since "what is remembered about [him] is the pointless stupidity of the man and his project. If his was a strategy for evading absurdity, it was self-defeating in its own absurdity".

References

Notes

Citations

Bibliography

Books

Studies

Websites

References

1. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
2. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
3. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Brinkhof. 2023; {{Harvard citation no brackets. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
4. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
5. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
6. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
7. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Brinkhof. 2023
8. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005. Cartwright. 2018 § The Temple
9. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
10. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Cartwright. 2018 § Artemis & Ephesus; {{Harvard citation no brackets. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
11. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
12. {{Harvard citation no brackets. ''Encyclopædia Romana''
13. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Cartwright. 2018 § The Temple
14. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
15. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
16. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
17. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
18. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Cartwright. 2018 § The Seven Wonders
19. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
20. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Cartwright. 2018 § Destruction & Rebuilding
21. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
22. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Azam. Ferrero. 2016
23. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
24. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010. Fraser. 2022
25. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Fawcett. 2016. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
26. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
27. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
28. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Fraser. 2022
29. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
30. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
31. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Price. House. 2017
32. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Cartwright. 2018; {{Harvard citation no brackets. ''Encyclopædia Romana''
33. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Cartwright. 2018
34. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
35. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
36. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
37. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
38. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
39. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Brinkhof. 2023
40. {{harvnb. Fraser. 2022
41. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Brinkhof. 2023
42. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
43. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
44. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
45. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
46. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
47. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Ribbans. 2010
48. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Fawcett. 2016
49. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Fawcett. 2016
50. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005. Brinkhof. 2023
51. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
52. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
53. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
54. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
55. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
56. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
57. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
58. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Street. 2020
59. {{harvnb. Street. 2020
60. {{harvnb. Street. 2020
61. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Fraser. 2022. Kidder. Oppenheim. 2010
62. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Fawcett. 2016
63. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
64. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
65. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Calafato. 2013
66. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Calafato. 2013
67. {{harvnb. Calafato. 2013
68. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
69. {{harvnb. Calafato. 2013
70. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
71. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
72. see {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005, ch. 3–4
73. {{harvnb. Calafato. 2013
74. {{harvnb. Calafato. 2013
75. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
76. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
77. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
78. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Azam. Ferrero. 2016
79. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
80. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
81. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Azam. Ferrero. 2016
82. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
83. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
84. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
85. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
86. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
87. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
88. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
89. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
90. {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005
91. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
92. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
93. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
94. see {{harvnb. Borowitz. 2005, ch. 4
95. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
96. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
97. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
98. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
99. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005. Brinkhof. 2023
100. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Azam. Ferrero. 2016
101. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
102. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
103. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Borowitz. 2005
104. {{Harvard citation no brackets. Scarre. 2007