In the ancient world, communication was minimal, resulting in contact between nations being few and far between. For this reason, each nation has developed its own vision of primacy, immediately avoiding others and strengthening itself. The Book of Exodus and the Histories of Herodotus are two of the earliest accounts of this world, telling stories of ancient Greece and ancient Egypt. In these texts, the foreigner and the native are described as the latter having a superiority complex, being physically violent towards the former, but they are also, in both cases, self-deprecating; however, in Herodotus' Histories, there is some form of respect, compassion, and curiosity for the stranger in the native eye. Therefore, the relationship between the two is driven by power, pure rivalry, but at the same time beneficial and understanding. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The ancient world bred hostility. Since any other nation could attack or become part of a vast empire, it was common to see a divide between different peoples. In Exodus, this division occurs between the Israelites, the natives, and the Egyptians, who are depicted as foreigners. When Pharaoh refuses to free the people because he "hardened his heart and did not listen to them, as the Lord had predicted" (Exodus 8:15), he lowers the esteem of the Egyptians as a whole, implying that they are ignorant and stubborn towards the Israelites especially regarding the ten plagues. This results in one relationship being ambitious to appear better than the other, and these implications are also similar to those in the description of the Egyptians in Herodotus. When, however, a Persian king stabs (what the Egyptians claim to be) a god, this "god" is wounded and exclaims, "'Truly worthy of the Egyptians is such a god as this!" (Herodotus 3:27). Here, the natives profess their value to be greater than that of the foreigners, claiming that their gods are much more superior and that it should be right for a "weak" god to adapt to a "weak" people. This need to represent the other as inferior and weaker derives, once again, from the competitive nature of the relationship. This also gives rise to blatant insults in these texts. For example, in Herodotus, “[the Egyptians], pervert the truth of history, claiming to be relatives of the house of Cyrus” (3.3), or in other words, they lie to appear much more important, and in this case, powerful. Another insult raises questions about the honor of foreigners and methods of approaching war, claiming that it is “intolerable for a woman to make an expedition against Athens” (8.93). These insults show not only their desire to appear better, but also their desire to defeat the other. Not only are there character insults, in Exodus, the superiority complex of the "chosen people", the Israelites, is evident in the insult of simply not caring about the Egyptians in any form. They have no remorse after the Passover when "there was no house in which there was not someone dead" (12:30), as there is no definitive written reaction to say otherwise. These feelings of believing oneself to be better than one's enemies and of having to express it are similar between the two texts, revealing a petty relationship between natives and foreigners. While verbal insults and insults serve to demonstrate a relationship of disgust for foreigners and a desire to be superior, the relationship between the two is also one of rivalry. The violence between the two groups is comparable to both Exodus and Herodotus, illustrating the more physical example. Herodotus writes that "nothing occurred except the abduction of women on both sides" (Herodotus 1.3), who werefurther raped and assaulted as a form of revenge for the attack on women on both sides, as a cause of hatred between Greeks and Greeks. the Persians. These extreme retaliations showcase their rivalry and mutual hatred and, above all, a contempt, considering that they can so easily and heartlessly attack their women, who are traditionally symbols of vulnerability. In Exodus, the Israelites behave similarly. Even though they were freed from mistreatment in Egypt, they continue to mistreat others. For example, they eventually make it to Canaan, attacking and sacking a city after barely escaping such behavior. Furthermore, with God's blessing, they “plundered Egypt” (Exodus 12:30), illustrating their desire to conquer their enemies. Coming from a nation that treated the Israelites badly to become one that treated others badly is evident, as in Herodotus, of ferocity and a desire to defeat the other. Although most of the relationship lies in hatred, in both texts there are also mentions of the negativity and antipathy of the natives themselves. In a way, the relationship is beneficial because there are small parts where the natives become aware of some of their shortcomings. In Herodotus there is an open confession that "the Hellenes wage wars... much without wise consideration" (7.9). This confession, perhaps, attenuates the blind disgust and mistreatment of foreigners, indicating that natives partially recognize that their treatment may be unjustified. However, in the Exodus, it is God himself who recognizes a flaw in the native and considered superior people. When the Israelites create a golden calf that they then begin to worship, God tells Moses, "Leave me alone, that my anger may be kindled against them, and that I may destroy them, and I will make of you a great nation" (Exodus 32: 10). Since it is God who declares that his followers are at fault and should be punished for attempting to attribute physicality to him, this reveals a truth and value about the Israelites: that they are not as perfect as they tend to claim and are righteous. as imperfect as their enemies. The inclusion of negative thoughts about the natives on their part is similar between the two works and, therefore, shows that the relationship is not purely hatred towards the other party without self-reflection. The only contrast between the depiction of the relationship between native and stranger in Herodotus and Exodus is that in Herodotus there are occasional expressions of sympathy for the stranger. Right in the introduction before the actual account of the events, Herodotus writes that the book will be composed of "great and marvelous works, which have been done by some Hellenes and some Barbarians" (1). In this statement there is recognition of the goodness of foreigners. It can be inferred that this statement also implies at least a modicum of respect, despite other previous arguments against anything, which differs from Exodus' depiction of a harsher relationship between native and stranger. In addition to this inference of respect, there is also a certain amount of curiosity present. Herodotus not only explores the events of other cultures in relation to his own Greek culture, but he does so in a way that is not as judgmental or discriminatory as would be in the best interest. In describing the customs and traditions of the Egyptians, he reveals that he has the opinion that they do everything backwards, for example “the women frequent the markets and trade, while the men sit at home at the loom (5.35). Although he says that what they do is, in a sense, reversed from what he is used to, he takes an anthropological approach: he simply observes. This observation is demonstrative of his desire for knowledge, and therefore of the native, towards the foreigner in a way that is not always subtle and.