Scholars have traced the beginnings of Greek historiography, or the writing of history, to the body of mythical tales, first transmitted orally in Greek culture, that made up its earliest literature. One of the main purposes of Greek myths, in fact, was to create a sense of the past and to make that past intelligible to the average citizen. Greeks first learned something about their origin as a people through Homeric poetry, some of which is now known to have a basis in fact and some of which was wholly imaginative. In some ways, as critics have observed, the events of the distant past became more real than the present, as stories of the gods and such mythical heroes as Odysseus and Agamemnon took hold of the national psyche. The Theogony, a work dating to the eighth century B.C. and generally attributed to Hesiod also supported this tradition by presenting the story of the beginning of the world based on legends of the Greek gods; the Works and Days, likewise attributed to Hesiod, related a kind of history of civilization by describing the various "ages" of the world. Early Greek poetry recited by bards at festivals and in private homes presented a past that was customarily viewed as at least partly factual; it also certainly kept alive an interest, albeit highly ethnocentric, as scholars have pointed out, in the idea of history.
The Greek worldview began to expand, however, in the mid-sixth century B.C., when Anaximander of Miletus began writing prose accounts about geography and eventually went on to construct a map of the known world. These two strands—mythical history and observational geography—helped to provide the impetus for what is often referred to as the Ionian intellectual revolution of the fifth century B.C. The chief two characteristics of this revolution were a new spirit of scepticism toward received myths and an interest in inquiry (historia) into matters concerning man and his world. During this period Greece was ruled first by Lydian overlords who controlled lands from Asia Minor to Sardis, and later by the Persians. Apparently inspired to find out more about their occupiers and about the other people with whom they came into contact through trade and travel, prose writers known as logographers, writing in the Ionian dialect of Greek, composed numerous accounts dealing with ethnology and anthropology, and preserving in writing many legends, folktales, traditions, and myths. The writings of the logographers have not survived, but they are thought to have played a key role in the development of Greek historiography, since, combined with later prose such as chronicles, genealogies, and reports of journeys, they constitute among the earliest of historical accounts. The culmination of this phase of historiography came in two works by Hecataeus of Miletus, Journey round the World and Genealogies—the first a geography interspersed with commentary, and the second a chronological generational scheme probably based on the Spartan king-list. As Michael Grant has observed, these two works "did not reject the [traditional] myths, but modified them here and there on commonsense, rationalistic grounds, examining them on their supposed merits in the light of [Hecataeus's] own judgment so as to make them more sane and credible." From there it was a relatively short leap to the historical approach of Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, and, later, Polybius.
Scholars often point out that, in discussing Greek historians, it is important to remember that they were not all Greek and not all historians. Herodotus came from bilingual Helleno-Carian Halicarnassus, Thucydides was of partly Thracian descent, Josephus was a Jew, and Procopius a Philistine. Further, they were influenced and inspired by contact with other cultures—the Syro-Iranian in the case of Herodotus, and Roman Italian in the case of Polybius. Many were voluntary or forced exiles from their country (for example, Diodorus of Sicily and Dionysius of Halicarnassus, first century B.C. Greek immigrants in Rome), and all did not even compose their works in the Greek language. Finally, they were in no sense "professional" historians, for many also composed poetry, philosophy, romance, anthropological works, and studies in physical science. Yet they all shared, to various extents, the basic Greek attitude toward history.
According to the prevailing view in Greek metaphysics, it ought to be impossible to know history: the Greeks believed that only certain unchangeable things and concepts can be understood and known and that anything changeable cannot be grasped by the mind. R. G. Collingwood has noted in this context how truly remarkable it is that the early Greek historians attempted to write history at all. As a result, Greek historians tended to concentrate on contemporary history—on what they witnessed in their own time. Another characteristic of the Greek attitude toward history is the belief that any written history must be treated simply as a collection of facts, without any causation necessarily implied, yet with the inherent possibility of clarifying future events. As Collingwood has written, "history has a value; its teachings are useful for human life; simply because the rhythm of its changes is likely to repeat itself, similar antecedents leading to similar consequents; the history of notable events is worth remembering in order to serve as a basis for prognostic judgments, not demonstrable but probable, laying down not what will happen but what is likely to happen, indicating the points of danger in rhythms now going on." History, then can teach; but ancient writers continued to consider poetry superior to history because, while history presented man with facts, poetry presented timeless truths. In the words of Aristotle in The Poetics, "Poetry…is a more philosophical and higher thing than history: for poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular." Scholars traditionally credit Thucydides with being the best of the Greek historians in terms of style and narration. Herodotus and Thucydides both used eyewitness accounts as evidence for their narratives, indicating that they carefully screened eyewitnesses by cross-examining them to ensure the truthfulness of their testimony. At the same time, however, they felt free to embellish their narratives with at least some measure of the fictional, as in the speeches attributed to historical personages in their histories.
Scholarship on Greek historiography has concerned itself with various questions, but chief among the topics studied have been the limitations of and the problem of the continuity of Greek historical writing, the investigation of the competency of the ancient historians, and inquiry into the influence and reception of their ideas. One of the main problems of studying Greek historiography is that so little of it survives: Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, and Polybius are the only Greek historians whose work has reached us in anything but fragments. Based on the available texts, critics have identified the fundamental problems inherent in the Greek view of history as being its small scope (the idea that history should only be written about events in living memory), the lack of choice with which the historian is presented (because contemporary subjects are deemed most suitable for study), and the fact that no comprehensive history can ever be written under the Greek model, since only a limited view of events is afforded each historian. For these and other reasons, scholars have concluded that, compared to other kinds of texts, Greek literature is comparatively poor in historical writing. They have explored some of the factors responsible for the break in the continuity of Greek historiography—or the question of why Herodotus's lead was not followed—and have cited such factors as Herodotus's unique ability to see his subject as part of a larger process, his interest in Egyptian and Asian "barbarian" cultures, and his unusually literary prose as partly responsible. As Arnaldo Momigliano has pointed out, "The fact is that Greek historiography never replaced philosophy or religion and was never wholeheartedly accepted by either. The status of historiography was never clearly settled among the Greeks." In fact, it seems more unusual that a figure like Herodotus ever emerged from the Greek tradition than that he was not the start of a new way of thinking about history. The validity of the historians' techniques and the question of disentangling the strands and degree of myth in their writings has long been a topic of debate. The statement made by the English historian Thomas Babington Macaulay in the nineteenth century still holds true: "The fictions [in Greek historical writing] are so much like the facts, and the facts so much like the fictions, that, with respect to many most interesting particulars, our belief is neither given nor withheld, but remains in an uneasy and interminable state of abeyance. We know that there is truth, but we cannot exactly decide where it lies."
Greek historiography has greatly influenced the later course of western historical writing as a discipline and has even made contributions to the growth of related genres such as biography, ethnography, geography, travel narratives, and romance. Momigliano has written that "Modern history-writing has been by choice a continuous confrontation with the Greek originals and with what the Romans made of their models." The major characteristics of Greek historical writing shaped the way that historians approached their work through the Roman and early Christian periods. The idea of using texts as evidence, concentrating on contemporary events, the notion of the historian as a witness and recorder of events, and the need to explain rather than merely enumerate events remained vital hallmarks of early historical thinking. The question, too, of the balance between instructing and giving pleasure to the reader of a given historical narrative, first debated by the ancient historians, still remains a point under discussion in modern times.
SOURCE: "History and Literature: Thomas Babington Macaulay," in The Varieties of History: From Voltaire to the Present, revised edition, edited by Fritz Stern, Macmillan and Co., 1970, pp. 71-89.
[Macaulay was a respected English writer and statesman whose best-known work is The History of England (1848-61), covering the reigns of James II and William III. In the following excerpt from his essay "History, " first published in the Edinburgh Review in 1828, he comments on Herodotus and Thucydides in the context of separating truth from fiction in historical writing.]
To write history respectably—that is, to abbreviate despatches, and make extracts from speeches, to intersperse in due proportion epithets of praise and abhorrence, to draw up antithetical characters of great men, setting forth how many contradictory virtues and vices they united, and abounding in withs and withouts—all this is very easy. But to be a really great historian is perhaps the rarest of intellectual distinctions. Many scientific works are, in their kind, absolutely perfect. There are poems which we should be inclined to designate as faultless, or as disfigured only by blemishes which pass unnoticed in the general blaze of excellence. There are speeches, some speeches of Demosthenes particularly, in which it would be impossible to alter a word without altering it for the worse. But we are...
(The entire section is 2910 words.)
SOURCE: An introduction to Greek Historical Thought, from Homer to the Age of Heraclius, translated by Arnorld J. Toynbee, 1924. Reprint by The Beacon Press, 1950, pp. v-xxviii.
[Toynbee was an eminent English sociologist and economist. In the following excerpt from his work on Greek historians, he argues that the writers included in this category were neither, by and large, solely Greek, nor only historians, because they also contributed to other genres.]
Ancient Greek or Hellenic historical thought began at the moment when the first rudiments of the poetry of Homer shaped themselves in Greek minds. It came to an end when Homer yielded precedence to the Bible as the sacred book of a Greek-speaking and Greek-writing intelligentzia. In the series of historical authors the latter event occurred between the dates at which Theophylactus Simocatta and George of Pisidia produced their respective works.… A historical process, however, seldom takes place abruptly, and the transition from Hellenic to Byzantine civilisation (of which this literary revolution was one sympton among many) occupied from first to last a period of fully three centuries. This becomes evident as soon as we bring other aspects of life into our field of vision. Paulus, for example, an Imperial Groom of the Bedchamber and a confrère of his contemporary the historian Agathias in the art of minor poetry, was still able in the sixth...
(The entire section is 4154 words.)
SOURCE: "Greco-Roman Historiography," in The Idea of History, 1946. Reprint by Oxford University Press, 1963, pp. 14-45.
[In the following excerpt, Collingwood analyzes some of the mental predispositions of Greek historians that influenced their view of history, historical writing, and the role of the historian.]
… I should like to point out how remarkable a thing is [the] creation of scientific history by Herodotus, for he was an ancient Greek, and ancient Greek thought as a whole has a very definite prevailing tendency not only uncongenial to the growth of historical thought but actually based, one might say, on a rigorously anti-historical metaphysics. History is a science of human action: what the historian puts before himself is things that men have done in the past, and these belong to a world of change, a world where things come to be and cease to be. Such things, according to the prevalent Greek metaphysical view, ought not to be knowable, and therefore history ought to be impossible.
(The entire section is 3444 words.)
SOURCE: An introduction to The Greek Historians: The Essence of Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Polybius, edited by M. I. Finley, The Viking Press, 1959, pp. 1-21.
[In the excerpt below, Finley explores the evolution of Greek historical thought, noting significant milestones in the shaping of the historians ' worldview, and concluding that "In the end, its intense political orientation, which was the great force behind the histories of Herodotus and Thucydides, was the fatal flaw in Greek historical writing. "]
History in its root sense means inquiry. For a considerable time before it took on the specific, narrower meaning the word now has, and even long thereafter— we still say "natural history"—the stress was on the inquiry as such, regardless of subject matter, on the search for explanation and understanding. Man is a rational being: if he asks rational questions, he can, by the unaided efforts of his intellect, discover rational answers. But first he must discover that about himself. The Greeks did, in the seventh century B.C. (insofar as so abstract a notion can be dated at all), and thereby they established the greatest of their claims to immor-tality. Significantly, the inquiry was first directed to the most universal matters, the nature of being and the cosmos. Only later was it extended to man himself, his social relations and his past.
It was no accident...
(The entire section is 6876 words.)
SOURCE: "The Greek Feeling for History," in The World of Herodotus, Little, Brown and Company, 1962, pp. 21-27.
[Here, de Sélincourt enumerates some of the main reasons why Greek tradition is comparatively poor in the area of history.]
Greek literature, the richest in the world after our own, Is comparatively poor in the department of history. Only two Greek historians have a title to greatness: Herodotus, first in time and incomparably the greater, and Thucydides. Xenophon, who continued the story of Greece where Thucydides left it, was a second-rate historian; he did indeed write one good book, his account—a splendid piece of first-hand reporting—of the expedition of a Greek mercenary army deep into the interior of Asia on a wild adventure in the service of the Persian prince, Cyrus; and he left some amiable tracts, in the manner of a country gentleman, on hunting and the management of an estate; but his major historical work few nowadays can bring themselves to read. Polybius, the fourth and last, was a writer of eminence, but though his long work included much Greek history, he was primarily a historian of Rome, telling the eventful story of her wars with Carthage. These four—unless we include Arrian, who wrote in the second century of our era a pious and competent history of Alexander the Great—complete the list of the Greek historians whose work has survived in anything but a fragmentary...
(The entire section is 2560 words.)
SOURCE: "Some Minor Historians," in The Historians of Greece and Rome, Taplinger Publishing Company, 1970, pp. 235-57.
[In the following excerpt, Usher presents an overview of two minor Greek historians-Diodorus of Sicily and Dionysius of Halicarnassus-who were émigrés living and working in Rome during the latter part of the first century B.C.]
Beginning with Diodorus of Sicily, we encounter history in its broadest conception. He inherited the idea of universal history from Ephorus, divested it of its Greek orientation, and included the whole of the inhabited world in a compendious Library of History. No less a Greek than Ephorus, he was convinced by two things of the obsoleteness of his 'Hellenocentric' view of the civilized world: he lived, like Polybius, under Roman rule; and, more significantly, he was influenced by a Stoic doctrine which radically affected his attitude to history, that of the brotherhood of man. The placing of his date of birth in the region of the year 90 B.C., probably at Agyrium in Sicily, makes it possible that he acquainted himself with the current teaching of the Stoic philosopher and historian Posidonius on that subject. Like several other Hellenistic historians, he made Rome his centre of study, but he travelled abroad at least as far as Egypt. He probably survived into the Augustan era. There is no evidence that he did anything of note except to write; and the...
(The entire section is 2541 words.)
SOURCE: "Myth, Memory, and History," in The Use and Abuse of History, The Viking Press, 1975, pp. 11-33.
[In the excerpt below, Finley examines the interaction between myth, memory, and history in Greek culture and writing, and posits that, because of certain methodological and metaphysical limitations, after the time of Herodotus and Thucydides, "serious Greek historical writing was about contemporary history" only.]
The Fathers of History were Greeks. Historians of antiquity are very proud of that, so much so that they prefer not to remember that some of the best minds in antiquity were not all impressed by this achievement. History as a discipline has always been a great favour-ite with the coiners of bons mots—it is false, it is dangerous, it is bunk. Historians can comfortably ignore the jibes and doubts of Walpole or Henry Ford, or even Goethe, but Aristotle is another matter; Aristotle, after all, founded a number of sciences and made all the others his own, too, in one fashion or another— except history and economics. He did not jibe at history, he rejected it, in the famous dictum in the ninth chapter of his Poetics:
Poetry is more philosophical and more weighty than history, for poetry speaks rather of the universal, history of the particular. By the universal I mean that such or such a kind of man will say or do such or such things...
(The entire section is 10555 words.)
SOURCE: "Greek Historiography," in History and Theory, Vol. XVII, No. 1, 1978, pp. 1-28.
[Below, Momigliano, a notable Italian historian, discusses the nature, transmission, and reception of Greek historical models and methods, noting that, even given its limitations for the modern historian, the significance of Greek historiography lies in the fact that it "spread among non-Greeks and became an international form of communication. "
Like the ancient Romans we are conscious of having inherited "history" …[istoria] from the Greeks. Herodotus is to us the "father of history," as he was to Cicero. We are also conscious that history has come to us as part of a greater legacy which includes the most important intellectual activities (such as philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, natural history, figurative arts), in which we are still involved—and more particularly the most prestigious literary genres (epic, lyric, eloquence, tragedy, comedy, novel, idyll), by which we still satisfy our needs for verbal expression.
We know, however, that, properly speaking, we ought not to use the word "inheritance" in the case of history or indeed for any other aspect of Greek culture. Since the humanists of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries made it their business to restore the validity of the ancient models after medieval deviations, it has been a question not so...
(The entire section is 10306 words.)
Barnes, Harry Elmer. A History of Historical Writing, second revised edition. New York: Dover Publications, 1962, 450 p.
Survey of the history of historical writing from the earliest times to the modern era. This work was first published in 1937.
Brown, Truesdell S. The Greek Historians. Lexington, Mass. and Toronto: D. C. Heath and Co., 1973, 208 p.
Overview that is "an attempt to indicate some of the important changes that took place in the writing of history from the old logographers down to the period of Roman supremacy."
Bury, J. Β. The Ancient Greek Historians. 1908. Reprint. New York: Dover Publications, 1958, 281 p.
Historical survey of Greek historiography (up to the first century B.C.) that traces "the principles, governing ideas, and the methods of the Greek historians, and [relates] them to the general movements of Greek thought and Greek history."
Butterfield, Herbert. "The Rise of Classical Historiography." In The Origins of History, edited by Adam Watson, pp, 118-37. New York: Basic Books, 1981.
Overview of the beginnings of Greek historical writing, focusing on attitudes toward the passage of time.
Gomme, Arnold Wycombe....
(The entire section is 435 words.)