Ancient Greek Historiography: From Herodotus to Zosimus
Greek Historiography: An Overview
Ancient Greek historiography flourished from the 5th century BC to the 4th century AD, encompassing writers from Herodotus to Zosimus, including prominent figures like Thucydides, Posidonius, and Polybius. Jacoby’s Fragmente der griechischen Historiker identifies 856 Greek historians, including mythographers and local chroniclers.
The Birth of Historiography
The concept of historiography originated in Greece, although earlier historical records existed in the East, such as ancient Egyptian king-lists. However, these lacked historical analysis and thus don’t qualify as historiography, despite their documentary value. Herodotus is widely considered the first true historian. Thucydides later established the rationale and methodology of historiography, reacting against the irrationality of Greek mythology. While Hecataeus of Miletus had earlier reduced the supernatural element, Thucydides achieved a complete separation. Herodotus viewed his History as a means of preserving noteworthy events from oblivion. Ancient Greek historians also saw history as a source of examples, though not necessarily predictive models. They critically examined the past and its alleged events. Herodotus, in IV, 195, 2, states: “Actually, I do not know if this is true, I simply record what is said.”[3]
Sources and Methodology
Oral sources predominated over written ones, especially in early historiography due to the scarcity of written material. Even when written sources were available, historians like Herodotus often preferred oral accounts and criticized those who relied solely on written sources, such as Timaeus. The Greeks generally didn’t know foreign languages, hindering their access to non-Greek chronicles, despite their interest. The reliance on oral tradition necessitated the development of a historical method, including source criticism and evaluation. Historians like Herodotus presented all known versions of events while acknowledging some as inaccurate. Oral tradition also required establishing a timeline to order the collected accounts. Written sources were primarily used by archaeologists and antiquarians studying ancient times.
Scope and Themes
Greek historiography generally transcended local history; Herodotus’s work, for example, covered most of the known world. War was a central theme, alongside constitutional history, biographies, ethnography, and tragic narratives. Topic selection depended on the significance of past events and available information. Herodotus considered an event historic if it deserved to be remembered. Thucydides chose the Peloponnesian War as his central theme, deeming it the most important event of his time. However, within this broad theme, he made subjective choices, sometimes embellishing accounts with details that might distort the narrative.[5]
Style and Sources
Schrader identifies three key elements of Greek historiography: an autobiographical preface emphasizing the work’s importance (first seen in Hecataeus of Miletus); an explanation of the historical methodology and sources; and the inclusion of speeches, often invented but reflecting the original sentiment.[21] Other less common elements include battle scenes and Herodotus’s characteristic digressions.[22] Oral sources generally prevailed over written ones, partly due to the focus on contemporary history and the difficulty of gathering oral information about ancient times, which often consisted of myths. Historians like Thucydides and Xenophon relied on their memories when describing events they witnessed.[4] The use of written sources increased as more material became available. When multiple sources with conflicting information existed, historians chose the most likely version.[23] This didn’t necessarily imply belief in its absolute truth, as Herodotus noted.[24] He sometimes presented multiple versions without judging their validity.
Development of Greek Historiography
Greek historiography emerged in the 5th century BC with Herodotus.[2] Some scholars attribute this relatively late development to the prevalence of myths and a lack of interest in rational explanations.[31] Earlier historical texts existed, but they lacked critical analysis.[32] These early accounts focused on local histories and supposed origins.[33]
Archaic Myth and Literature
Early archaic history consisted of legendary tales, exemplified by Homer. While some consider him a precursor to historiography,[35] others see him as a chronographer who established the concept of chronological sequence.[36] The influence of myth began to decline with Hecataeus of Miletus, who contrasted the long history of the East with that of Greece. Several factors contributed to the rise of historiography: the desire for exploration and investigation, leading to voyages of discovery; the development of a rational worldview, leading to geography and cartography; and the replacement of myth with rational explanations by logographers. Genealogies tracing family ancestry also played a role. Prominent logographers included Cadmus of Miletus, Hellanicus of Lesbos, and Hecataeus of Miletus.[37] Rudimentary annals, such as Hippias’s list of Olympic victors, were also created. Some scholars emphasize the influence of the Persian Empire, arguing that contact with Persia made the Greeks aware of their own heritage and encouraged them to record their history.[38]
Herodotus
Herodotus, born between 490 and 480 BC in Halicarnassus, traveled extensively after being exiled for participating in a conspiracy. His travels informed his work. He died around 425 BC, possibly in Thurii. Herodotus’s work marked a departure from previous historical accounts. He was a clearly defined author, not a mere reciter of stories attributed to muses. His work focused on human events, excluding divine intervention.[41] Schrader divides Herodotus’s History into three sections: a history of Lydia, a history of Persia, and a history of the Greco-Persian Wars. The work, divided into nine books by the Library of Alexandria, follows a ternary structure. Each passage has three parts: an introduction, a digression, and a narrative of the episode, with possible additional digressions.[42] Herodotus’s research also had a threefold approach.[43] His History relies primarily on oral sources. When encountering different versions, he presented them all, choosing the most common one.[44] He also used written sources, including poets, inscriptions, administrative lists, oracles, logographers, and contemporary literature. His lack of knowledge of some languages led to mistranslations. He drew from earlier authors, notably Hecataeus of Miletus.[45] His work also includes geographical and ethnographic descriptions based on his travels.
Thucydides
Thucydides, born in Athens around 460-455 BC to a wealthy family, served as a strategos during the Peloponnesian War. Blamed for a military defeat in 424 BC, he went into exile, where he likely died in 398 BC.[50] Some scholars dispute his exile.[51] His unnamed work, divided into eight books, is commonly known as the History of the Peloponnesian War.[52] Left unfinished due to his death, the work’s composition has been debated. The prevailing “unitary” theory suggests continuous writing, with debate focusing on when he began.[53] Thucydides distinguished between superficial and real causes of war, rejecting divine intervention. He saw the war as inevitable due to Sparta’s fear of Athenian power. Some scholars find his analysis of causes underdeveloped.[54] While not immediately influential, he later became a model, his distinctive style emulated by Roman historians like Suetonius and Tacitus.[55] Like Herodotus, he primarily used oral sources but also consulted inscriptions for accurate figures. He critically evaluated oral reports, drawing on his own experience as a witness.[56]
Xenophon and the Hellenica Oxyrhynchia
Xenophon, born in Athens in 431 BC, continued Thucydides’s unfinished work with his Hellenica. He also wrote a biography of Cyrus the Great (Cyropaedia), works on Socrates’s trial, and the Anabasis, recounting Cyrus the Younger’s expedition against Artaxerxes II, in which Xenophon participated.[58] Unlike earlier Greek histories, the Anabasis focuses on a short period and a single character, Xenophon himself. He differs from Thucydides by reintroducing divine influences in the Hellenica.[59] His style is considered decadent and pessimistic, with excessive rhetoric and limited methodological rigor. Despite being a lesser historian, his complete works are valuable sources.[60] The Hellenica Oxyrhynchia, discovered in the 20th century, also continues Thucydides’s work.[61] While lacking style, it offers objectivity and factual accuracy, making it a more reliable source than Xenophon.[61] The author’s identity is uncertain, with Krathippos of Athens being a likely candidate.[62] Other possibilities include Theopompus,[63] Ephorus,[64] Androtion, Anaximenes, and Demades.[65]