Ancient Greek Historians
As compared with verse Greek prose was of slow development. Disregarding early Ionian chroniclers and compilers whose writings, devoid of any charm of style are lost, the first important name is that of Herodotus (5th century, BC), the "Father of History." His fascinating 'History' (in nine books, written in the Ionic dialect) tells the story of the growth of Persia and her wars with Greece. The chronicle is enlivened by many entertaining anecdotes. The style, while loose in structure and parenthetical, has great charm and lucidity. Herodotus is not a critical or scientific historian in the modern sense of the term, but his work, properly estimated, is of very great value.
Thucydides, in his 'History of the Peloponnesian War,' in eight books, has a different conception of the historian's task. A contemporary of, and participant in, the lone; struggle for supremacy between Athens and Sparta, he strives to give an accurate account not only of the actual events of the war but also of their causes. His style is rather austere, and shows strongly the influence of the rhetorical tendencies which were potent at the time. Prominent in his work are the speeches. of which the most famous is the 'Funeral Oration' of Pericles in Book II. Of great interest, too, is the account of the ill-fated Sicilian Expedition and the description of the ravages of the plague in Athens.
Thycydides says of his Peloponnesian War [431-404 BC] "With reference to the speeches in this history, some were delivered before the war began, others while it was going on; some I heard myself, others I got from various quarters; it was in all cases difficult to carry them word for word in one's memory, so my habit has been to make the speakers say what was in my opinion demanded of them by the various occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to the general sense of what they really said. And with reference to the narrative of events, far from permitting myself to derive it from the first source that came to hand, I did not even trust my own impressions, but it rests partly on what I saw myself, partly on what others saw for me, the accuracy of the report being always tried by the most severe and detailed tests possible."
The third and last historian of the Attic Period is Xenophon (born about 431 BC) the author of the 'Hellenica' and 'Anabasis'. In the 'Hellenica,' a work of no great inspiration, the narration of Hellenic affairs is continued from the conclusion of Thucydides' history down to the battle of Mantinea (362 BC). The 'Anabasis' is a work of permanent value by reason of the interest of the subject-matter and the freshness of its style. It tells the story of the march inland into Asia of the 10,000 Greek mercenaries under Cyrus, the young Persian prince; of the death of Cyrus; of the vigorous leadership of Xenophon, who accompanied the expedition, and their adventurous, but successful, trip home. Xenophon's 'Memorabilia' or Recollections of Socrates pictures the Master on the personal side. Minor essays are also extant. Xenophon, ancient Greek historian and general [b. Athens, about 434 BC; d. Corinth, about 355 BC] lived during a period in which the greatest political and intellectual excitement existed at Athens, and in which the most distinguished men, of whom he was one, appeared on the stage. Xenophon was a disciple of Socrates. He was said to have fought with his teacher in the Peloponnesian war, and to have had his life saved by Socrates in the battle of Delium (424 BC), but this is not now accepted.
When the Persian prince, Cyrus the Younger contended with his elder brother Artaxerxes Mcmnon for the throne, the Lacedaemonians sent him auxiliaries, among whom Xenophon served as a volunteer. Cyrus was defeated and lost his life on the field of Cunaxa (401 BC). The principal officers of the auxiliary army having been likewise killed in battle, or taken prisoners by artifice, and then put to death, Xenophon was apparently selected to command the Greek forces, 10,000 men strong. They were in a most critical situation, in the midst of a hostile country, without cavalry, surrounded by enemies and innumerable difficulties; but Xenophon was able to inspire them with confidence, to repress insubordination, and to lead them in their return march of 1,500 miles to the Black Sea. Xenophon himself has described this retreat, and at the same time the whole expedition of the younger Cyrus, in his 'Anabasis,' the most famous of military narratives. There is no means of verifying the statements of this work.
There were numerous lost historians of the fourth centuy BC, especially of the school of Isocrates, who were much praised and quoted, and formed the principal materials from which Plutarch, Diodorus, and other writers of the Roman period drew their facts. It is, however, not easy to separate those of a later period from those who flourished before the death of Alexander; for there is a continuous stream of names reaching down to the Roman times. The enquiry into what were the sources of Plutarch’s biographies, or of the later histories, forms a favourite exercising ground for the Germans, and Plutarch, or Diodori, or of the rest, inundate the learned periodicals. Unfortunately, though there are many criticisms upon these authors, especially by Polybius, and by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who reviews the most important of them, there is not a single specimen of their style sufficient to afford an independent judgment. They are cited for facts; they are criticised by one another, at times savagely ; they are praised and blamed, but never quoted verbatim at any length.
None of these writers were in anyone’s judgment (except their own) equal to the three great masters, Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon, who have fortunately survived. All sound ancient critics note this inferiority, not only in judgment and critical knowledge of political and military affairs, but, what would have pained the authors far more, in style. For they were trained rhetoricians, who cultivated manner with conscious care, and sought to outdo the great models placed before them. One imitated Herodotus, another Thucydides, another Xenophon, but, like almost all copies, they were wanting in the vividness, the grace, and the power of the originals.
There was apparently a self-conscious and controversial tone about them ; they were exercised not only in the jealousies of rival schools, but in the party politics of the day ; they wrote history as rhetoricians, and as partisans, if not of men, at least of political theories. Hence later days neglected them, and amid the wreck of the dark ages no one exerted himself to save them. One alone, from a later age, survives.
Polybius was doubtless the soberest and most valuable of these Epigoni. His work is of the highest value to the historian, as a long series of approving critics has amply shown, but as a stylist he never has been, and never will be, read. He is a valuable moment in the historical development of the Greeks ; he forms no part of their classical literature.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
