1

Compare and contrast the methods and objectives of the classical and Hellenistic historians

 Herodotus

Herodotus of Halicarnassus has been called “the father of history”. By using the sources which

were available to him and also by gaining a wealth of first hand information on his endless travels,

Herodotus produced an immortal book which ranks as one of the most readable and interesting

product of classical history.

Herodotus is at his best when he settles into his favourite role of story teller. He successfully

handles pathos, humour and gentle irony. And he is always willing to digress from his main theme

for the sake of an engrossing tale or fascinating description. He has a healthy scepticism.

Herodotus’ work was a literary composition with a wide scope and exceedingly wide contents. Like

an Ode of Pindar and an Athenian tragedy. It had a beginning, middle and an end. But the plan of

the whole work was simple and Herodotus only had one aim in writing the histories. He only

wanted to preserve the records of the great deeds, whether of Greek or Persians, and to discover the

reasons for the quarrel between them.

“...I hope to do two things: to preserve the memory of the past by putting on record the astonishing

achievements both of our own and the Asiatic peoples; secondly and more particularly, to show how the two

races came into conflict.”

 2

Herodotus was the first to formulate the complex threefold notion of history.

1. Men’s deeds have intrinsic value for Man, and are worth saving from oblivion.

2. Great deeds are no monopoly of any people: there is an ‘other side’ even to the Persian

wars.

3. Such deeds are not chanced occurrences; they spring from motives, which may be

ascertained. The present has its cause in the past, and the past has values for the present

as a guide to the future.

This is what got him the title of “father of History”.

Herodotus starts his history with mythological accounts from the beginning of Greece to the Persian

wars. He acquired his data from third sources. In other words he relied heavily on existing

inscriptions and on Oral testimony. The first Persian invasion took place just before he was born,

and the second took place when he was a child. So he had to use third sources to gain information

and mixed the historical facts with gossip and myths therefore some critics argue that this makes his

data unreliable. But we should also understand that he also had ample chances to talk with people

who had witnessed or played a part in both of those events, before the passage of time had dimmed

them or made them legendary.

He also had visible evidences of buildings and monuments which may have played a huge role in

helping him to decide whether the information he gathered from his third sources were true or not.

Also the first line of his book “these are the researches of Herodotus of Halicarnassus” shows

that he did do a certain research. And when he got more than one account he was careful to record

both or all. “My duty is to report what I hear - but I am not obliged to believe everything
 3

equally”. He himself usually indicated which account which he himself preferred and the he left the

reader to make his choice. We can see a similarity on this between Thucydides and Herodotus. Both

gave the choice to the reader to decide what to believe or not.

Herodotus’ language is simple and poetic because the book was written for public recital and it was

natural to use poetic language. And also during his time there was no division between the

scientific and imaginative mind. So the poetic language was accepted. Other than this for Herodotus

his book was a literary work rather than just a list of events. Dividing his book into nine parts and

naming them by the names of the nine muses proves this point.

He jumps into the narrative to express his own opinions and ideas.

“..At this point I find myself compelled to express an opinion, which I know most people would

object to” (p 460)

“...for I cannot myself see what possible use there could have been in fortifying the Isthmus, if the

Persians had the command of the sea” (p 460) Proves the above mentioned fact.

And the following line “As nobody has left a record, I cannot state the precise number” shows his

honesty as a historian.

The following line “This however took place long after Xerxes’ invasion of Greece, and I must get

back to the story” shows that he realizes when he diverts from his story. But his main objective in

writing the book was to preserve what men had done and to prevent the great and wonderful deeds

done by the Greeks and the Barbarians lose its glory. So because of this objective he tries to record
 4

these deeds as much as possible and in doing so he occasionally loses his track of the current

narration.

He makes his narration of history dramatic. He gives ethnographical details about the people

involved in the Persian war. This fact is clearly shown through his descriptions of Xerxes’ army.

Even though he criticizes his people at times we can see that he is clearly biased. He paints a

superior picture of his people and an inferior picture of the Persians in other words the barbarians.

 Thucydides

Thucydides of Athens was the first real scientific historian of the west. Although he read and

admired Herodotus his approach to the writing of history is very different from that of his

somewhat older contemporary. His field of interest is narrow. He limits himself to the detailed

study of the history being made during his own lifetime. His objective was to analyze political

power and the military action backing the political policy. Being a soldier and an intellectual he

writes expertly on military campaigns.

He wrote in a complicated style. This style was overloaded and lacking in charm. In his struggle

to convey an action or a statement precisely, Thucydides has juggled sentences in a sophisticated

way. This has created a huge problem to the modern reader, in understanding what he is saying.

Nothing mattered to Thucydides other than the events and the issues. So he was dedicated in
 5

getting them right. He devoted himself to accuracy and understanding and he reports his findings

without adornment.

“And it may well be that my history will seem less easy to read because of the absence in it of a romantic

element. It will be enough for me, however, if these words of mine are judged useful by those who want to

understand clearly the events which happened in the past and which will, in some time or other and in

much the same ways, be repeated in the future. My work is not a piece of writing designed to meet the

needs of an immediate public, but was done to last forever”

These lines clearly show his objectives and method of writing.

Thucydides’ history unfolds without gods, oracles and omens. This was the greatest break from

Herodotus. For Thucydides history was strictly a human affair, capable of analysis and understanding

entirely in terms of known patterns of human behaviour without the intervention of the supernatural.

“I am about to discuss the disease called ‘sacred’. It is not in my opinion, anymore divine or sacred than

other diseases, but has a natural cause, and its supposed divine origin is due to men’s inexperience and

to their wonder at its peculiar character”.

No historian has ever surpassed Thucydides in the ability to portray a typical figure or situation.

Pericles’ funeral oration and the plague and the other debates make the book a possession of all

times. The continuous war narrative in which they are embedded has another quality and another

interest. Without it the big scenes and the main ideas would lose there persuasiveness. It the

accuracy of the narration that makes the rest seems so real and convincing. On the other hand

Thucydides was right in believing that the mere pilling up of details, no matter how carefully

chosen and described, would eventually lose its interest.

 6

He followed an annalistic system in describing the events. Such as

1. He treats the events of each year separately

2. He singles out certain episodes for detailed treatment, but there are other events which he

records in bald and brief sentences, in the exact style of a chronicler or an analyst.

As an example we can show the way he describes the opening year of the war, Thucydides

devotes most of his attention to the incident at Plataea and its immediate consequences, the

preparations on both sides for the invasion of Attica and the invasion itself. The offensive

movement of the Athenians are treated in rather a summery fashion. This also shows that he is

biased in his writing no matter how hard he tries not to be. Thucydides tries to find a

compromise between the method of the analyst and that of the selective and critical historian.

Thucydides stands out from the other historians by his independence of outlook and his skill in

applying the principles of the rhetorical school to historical writing. He adopts a uniform style

for his speeches and maintains it throughout the book. Even though the style is similar each

speaker differs by their attitudes and the reasoning they express.

There is also a marked difference in style between the elaborate analyses and descriptions on one

hand and the purely factual passages about geography, military movements and the like on the

other. His narrow frame works allows the reader to experience an intimacy with human nature

and the forces that controls his individual and social life. His style mirrors his thoughts. And the
 7

limitation of his perspective allowed him to generalize on insufficient data and it also enabled

him to discover their most inward, most essential causes.

Thucydides when he sets himself to describe the great actions of the war he unconsciously or

most probably consciously falls into the manner of the tragedians rather than of Herodotus or

any prose writer. Thucydides paired speeches and arguments hold striking are a lot similar to

Euripides’ style. Of course it’s natural for him to be influenced by tragedy which was his city’s

unique discovery and her most characteristic form.

 Comparing Thucydides and Herodotus

HHerodotus Thucydides

 Wrote about the events which  Work was based on events he

took. place when he was a kid. had experienced.

 Not linear in his writing.  Linear in his writing

 Didn’t care for the chronological  Cared for the chronological

order. order

 Introduction is not long and it is  Introduction is long and goes

simple. into more detail.

 Related everything to god and  Didn’t use myths a lot, reduced

used myths a lot. amount of divine participation.

 Was writing for his  Wrote for the future generation.

 8

contemporaries.

There are other similarities and differences between Herodotus and Thucydides. Thucydides like

Herodotus focuses on incidents that happened within a limited period and again like Herodotus he

sets out to give the causes and antecedents of the quarrel between the combatants. Just like

Herodotus Thucydides also have digressions. For an example before the scene shifts to Sicily

Thucydides gives a brief sketch of Sicilian history and of the Greek settlements there, just as

Herodotus seized the opportunity for a digression on Egypt before describing the campaign of

Cambyses in that country. But Thucydides keeps his digressions within limits. He doesn’t attempt

to put down everything he knows like Herodotus.

Like Herodotus Thucydides clearly reminds the reader that believing or disbelieving the legends

and the myths rests on them. But Thucydides protests against the incorrect application of myths into

contemporary history and he says that legends true or not should at least be reasonable. Here he is

criticizing Herodotus. He is careful in his descriptions of Athenian local traditions, especially

religious practices.
 9

Herodotus and Thucydides both are biased in their writing. Both support Athens and praise her.

Thucydides’ partiality becomes crystal clear in the famous funeral oration of Pericles. In this

speech he talks about the greatness of the Athenian empire, Athenian government and law, the

Athenian way of life and so on. And also in page 140 he says “fix your eyes everyday on the

greatness of Athens as she really is, and should fall in love with her.” this line further clarifies the

above mentioned point.

Herodotus tried to recreate the atmosphere and the events of the past some of it so remote that he

wouldn’t have been able to interview anyone who would have been alive at the time. Thucydides

on the contrary was a contemporary and a direct participant in his war. According to Thucydides

the past can’t be cross examined. It’s only through most patient checking and double checking

could we reach the truth.

Xenophon

Xenophon was born at Athens, but spent most of his adult life in Asia Minor and Sparta. Although

he studied with Socrates in his youth, he was a man of action rather than a philosopher, and he

turned to a military career winning undying fame as a leader and a writer. His best known work is

the Anabasis or the retreat of the Ten Thousand which has been called “the most famous retreat in

military history”.

 Leadership insight in Xenophon

 10

Xenophon’s anabasis is considered as the first systematic book on leadership. Xenophon is a

prolific writer. His writing is considered a treasure trove of examples of successful leadership.

Leadership for Xenophon was the art of inspiring the spirit and the act of following regardless of

the external circumstances. He wanted to establish a standard for what leadership ought to be.

Xenophon was one of the well-to-do disciples of Socrates who left Athens to serve with the

Greek contingent "the Ten Thousand" raised by Cyrus the Younger of Persia against Artaxersus.

These troops served Cyrus at the disastrous battle of Cunaxa (401 BC). When Cyrus was killed,

the Ten Thousand were forced to flee or surrender to the Persians, they were demoralized and

discouraged as they saw no way of marching 1,000 miles back to Greece with 10,000 soldiers

through unfriendly country, not to mention that they currently faced a numerically superior

army.

Xenophon assembled the officers and spoke to them. "All of these soldiers have their eyes on

you, and if they see that you are downhearted they will become cowards, while if you are

yourselves clearly prepared to meet the enemy and if you call on the rest to do their part, you can

be sure that they will follow you and try to be like you."

Xenophon expected positive results and he got them. The Ten Thousand escaped from

Artzxerxes and followed Xenophon on the most amazing march in history, despite countless

battles and hardships. The success of the five-month march, one of the most famous in military

history, was a triumph of discipline and improvisation in the face of overwhelming odds.

Xenophon not only managed to lead his men out of Persia, but succeeded in keeping the army

intact as a fighting force.

 11

Xenophon is loyal to Thucydides and maintains his tradition. So throughout his histories he

preserves the chronological order of Thucydides, recording the events of each year separately

and adding brief notices of events which he doesn’t describe in detail. But he is certainly is not

conscious as Thucydides in marking the beginning of each summer and winter season and each

new year of the war; on several occasions the passage of time had to be deduced from events

from the text.

On every page of the Anabasis the contrast between the Greek and the barbarians is sharply

drawn. The barbarian world vast and diverse, feudal and ancient or tribal and savage, the Greek

world compacted and united by the sea and despite variety the Greek world is one in its

approach to life.

So much of Greek history is concerned with its relations in war and peace, with the ruling power

of Asia. So that the inside view afforded by the Anabasis is uniquely precious. And in the fifth

and the sixth books we can see a better picture of the Greek colonies. Above all what is

important is that in this book Xenophon teaches us what ordinary Greeks were like.

Xenophon’s Anabasis is considered as the first systematic book on leadership. Xenophon was

predominantly interested on soldering and country life rather than politics or constitutional

matters like Thucydides. Leadership to Xenophon was the art of inspiring the spirit and the act

of following regardless of the external circumstances. He wanted to establish a stranded for what

leadership ought to be.

 12

 Xenophon’s general characteristics

The first point which we can mention is that Xenophon’s work is characterized by novelty. One

of his outputs includes the earliest autobiographical narrative, the Anabasis. Second point is that

his subject matters reflect his personal experiences. Anabasis was based on the adventure of 401-

400. His other works like Hellenica arose from a personal take on the politico-military history of

his times. Treatises on military command, horsemanship, house hold management and hunting

were derived from personal experience of each. Ways and means were inspired by concern

about Athens’ finances and political fortunes. And another book of his Hiero originated after his

visit to Sicily.

The third characteristic which we can see is that Xenophon’s agenda is essentially didactic, with

direct and indirect references to military or leadership skills. And it was often advanced through

the use of history as a source of material. As a narrative historian Xenophon has a reputation for

inaccuracy and incompleteness, but what he thought was that the people and the events from the

past were tools for promoting political and ethical improvement.

In his recital of Omens and portents he is less critical and severe. He clearly believes these are

supernatural warnings and records them without comments. Earthquakes, thunderstorms and the

omens of sacrifices are all reported in similar style. But he had this system of interconnecting

with the gods which may challenge many of the modern readers. In Anabasis book seven

Xenophon has portrayed the divine power as anonymous and singular so that he could take a
 13

pragmatic attitude. Like posing a question to the Delphic oracle that was framed to produce the

‘right’ answer. For his contemporaries who saw things differently his skills may have seemed

distinctive.

The fourth characteristic is that he is considered ingenuous because of his style. His style was

considered to be plain, sweet, persuasive, graceful poetic and a model of attic purity. His style is

modest. The simplicity of his language is what produces the finest effects. He has the simplicity

of Herodotus but lacks his charm. And while he has some of the solemnity of Thucydides he has

neither his insight nor his power.

Anabasis is a narrative which captures the reader and at the same time it invites the reader to

think about the tactical, strategic and leadership skills of those involved. On a political and ethno

cultural point of view it expresses a general view of Greek superiority to ‘barbarians’. On every

page of the Anabasis the contrast between Greek and barbarian is sharply drawn- the barbarian

world vast and diverse, ancient and feudal and savage. Whereas the Greek world is depicted as

compact and united by the sea and despite its differences the Greek world had a common

approach towards life.

It should be remembered that we only have Xenophon’s word for the importance of his part in

the achievement. Other contemporary references to the expedition attributes no such leadership

to Xenophon, and we are driven to the conclusion that the Anabasis, though it is Xenophon’s

best book is no more than a piece of propaganda and self-vindication. Nonetheless the story of
 14

the 10,000 is a history lesson packed with political, social and cultural implications and is a saga

that demands to be retold and reread over and over again.

Xenophon and Herodotus were similar in their writing style. Both used simple language and

simple structure and were clear in their writing. But Thucydides differs here because of his

complicated elaborate language and style. When looking at Thucydides and Xenophon we see

that both wrote about contemporary incidents and both of them were active participants in the

war, unlike Herodotus. And although Herodotus and Thucydides deal with the distinction

between the Greeks and the barbarians, it’s in Xenophon’s Anabasis that we see the distinction

stressed in each page more strongly.

Bibliography
 15

 Pearson, Lionel. The local Historian of Attica. The American Philological Association

Philadelphia: Pennsylvania, 1942.

 Sinclair, T.A. A History of Classical Greek Literature. Broadway House: carter lane, 1934.

 Findley, John. H. Three Essays on Thucydides. Massachusetts: Harvard university press,

1967.

 Myres, John.L. Herodotus Father Of History. London; Clarenden press, 1953.

 Mcniff, William.T. Greek and Roman Writers. USA: the Macmillian Company, 1962

 Findley, John. H. Thucydides. London: Oxford University press, 1942.