Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
Influential Ancient Historians
Faces of History: Historical Inquiry from Herodotus to Herder by Donald R. Kelley
In his book, which is written in a scholarly, colorful, and interesting style, and is as rich with thought-provoking questions as it is lean on assumptions, author Kelley goes to great lengths to set the stage for every historian's work that he discusses. On page 3, he says that "the difficulty" in writing about ancient historians, is, initially, "the question of what qualifies, retrospectively, as 'history'." Does one include the writings of an ancient historian like Herodotus, Kelly asks, since Herodotus's "inquiries" are very subjective and do not fit "modern prescriptions of historical methods"?
And as one reads through the various books on ancient historians, it becomes apparent that chroniclers like Herodotus must be considered historians because there is little else to base "history" upon - and moreover, it is vain and narrow in vision to consider modern objectivity as the only legitimate approach to the past.
Meantime, Kelley (p. 4) presents a point by illustrating the difference - the "polarization" of strategies - between two giants of ancient history, Herodotus and Thucydides; he cites Herodotus's style of story-telling and curiosity, and Thucydides' interrogative inquiries into the causes and "progression" of the Peloponnesian wars. And in that setting, Kelley asks, which distinctive technique is to be more valid: is it "history which tells a story, with or without a point, [or] history which poses a question, whether answerable or not." Both of those techniques will be presented through discussions of several important historians, in this paper. Kelley also rather succinctly sums up the difficulty presented to today's generation of scholars - and those researchers from the more recent past -when it comes to deciding what was factual, and what was simply oral history handed down and perhaps watered down from its origins. "Whatever messages authors may have wanted to send" (p. 6), he writes, "the messages received are construed in different times, places, and circumstances." He continues, brilliantly portraying the larger question of the truth behind history: "The historians behind the words, like the thoughts between the lines, are truly beyond our grasp...[and] the histories that we read have been written in worlds that are not only different but even in some ways incommensurable..."
And with that profound introduction to the subject of ancient historians, the paper will examine historical analyses from several other noted scholars.
Literary Texts and the Roman Historian - by David S. Potter
Author David Potter (p. 12) writes that "good and bad history was evaluated in terms of its relationship to truth." That last phrase is telling, in the sense of a search for objectivity, given that so much evidence - in previous analysis of ancient historians - exists that shows there was not always a desire to present the truth by the ancients, rather, there seemed a passion for them to spin it their way, lest someone else would come along and lay it out another way. And Potter also makes a salient point (p. 15) when he writes: "the dichotomy between 'true' and 'false' in the evaluation of history may also be connected with the tendency to discuss the work of historians in language laden with moral overtones." The language we discover when we read ancient history, Potter continues, "reflects a tendency to attribute value to a statement because of a speaker's reputation rather than by invoking an external control of reliability." How credible the speaker was, and the injection of moral overtones certainly suggests strong subjectivity, which today's historians would probably not accept. Let's say, the "historian" writing about 9/11 spent a number of pages not just chronicling events leading up to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, but blasting the Clinton Administration - in strong political tones - for not dispensing with (e.g., killing) bin Laden long before. Certainly the Clinton years, and the first eight months of the Bush era, are part and parcel of the background story - in Bush's case, his administration was given detailed, pointed, well researched documents that warned his team of terror being planned. And certainly the FBI had ample evidence that radical Islamic fundamentalists with wads of money were training to fly but didn't want to learn how to land. But if the "historian" writing that piece laid blame on Bush, or Clinton, as an absolute political factual point, it would no longer be considered objective.
It's no big surprise that in ancient times, given that access to any information was restricted, if a writer only had one source, that the "facts" would be slanted that way. And (p. 15) Potter spells it out directly, albeit subjectively, when he writes that if a person did not investigate the truth "accurately, the chances were that he was a self-conscious liar or a fool."
It's germane to note that, in pre-printing press times, the word "publication" - which today means dissemination of written texts in numerous genres - meant that "an author has lost control of his text" (p. 29).
There were three stages to publication, Potter explains. The first stage (ekdosis), was when the author considered his or her work completed, and handed it on to followers. The second stage of publication (diadosis) indicated that the work was given to "the world at large" - and the third stage, paradosis, was the passing on of a text from one generation to another. What sometimes happened, to alter the text's meaning, was that when friends or students asked the writer for a copy, the writer would provide notes from the text, and those notes were sometimes later represented as factual excerpts of the text.
Potter explains that "Historiography" - in the Greco-Roman genre - should be seen by the researcher as the "process of acquiring knowledge and explaining it rather than as a record" (p. 79). This helps explain why "objective" historical records are very few and far between; the historical writer is trying to find the information, and interpret it, analyze it. And since so many obstacles were put in the path of those long-ago historians, nit-picking about their lack of pure objectivity seems almost petty. Meantime, Potter points out (p. 80) that in about the 5th Century BC a more "systematic record of phenomena developed," making it possible for a relationship - albeit "problematic" - to be established between "historians" and other "systematic recorders of events." Basically, that means things began to be written down in a more consistent way - although the nagging issue of subjectivity vs. objectivity still remains a subject of debate among scholars in 2003.
Greek and Roman Historians - by Michael Grant
The writings of ancient historians, Michael Grant's book clearly shows, were continually offering future readers their interpretation of history, allowing their prejudices and personal feelings to enter into their chronicles - all of which defies and is the antithesis of pure modern objectivity, Indeed, the ancient historians did not consider it obligatory to acknowledge all sources, but rather they often followed a path of "ignoring or rejecting" (p. 37) what data they did not wish to include, Grant informs us. Ancient historians also did not make "judicious" use of which sources should be followed. Xenophon, the Greek historian, for example, admitted that he omitted actions if they were "not worth mentioning" (p. 38), Grant observed. But this is not to say all ancient historians are to be discredited, just because they did not follow the path of pure objectivity, or AP style journalism, or Chicago Style, or Harvard style citations. Quite the contrary. The great body of ancient historical records is illuminating and highly informative - notwithstanding "flaws" by today's modern standards - in its presentation.
It's very easy in the year 2003 to look back in stern judgment at the genuineness of a writer of the history of Rome, Livy, who may have recorded that the granting of provocatio - the first known right of appeal from a magistrate - occurred on three separate occasions, 509, 449, and 300 (P. 38). And part of the reason these glitches occurred was that early history, early society, was "much more oral than our own" (p. 39); a chronicler simply listening to an older person relate his interpretation of events, then writing them down, opened the door to inaccuracies. Grant believes oral history, in many cases, was "incomplete, contradictory, untrustworthy, and sometimes purely fictitious" (p. 39). And before the reader in 2003 stands too harshly in judgment, one has to remember that even today, professionals - such as the New York Times reporter who was recently fired - on occasion invent stories for their own purposes.
And beyond the issue of fictitious historical writing, Grant discusses the rumors and innuendos - using Roman historian Tacitus's work as an example of these kinds of distortions. "He implants grave suspicions which he neither substantiates nor refutes. Their cumulative effect can be damning and distorting" (p. 41). Grant reports that…[continue]
"Ancient Historians" (2003, July 29) Retrieved October 26, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/ancient-historians-151177
"Ancient Historians" 29 July 2003. Web.26 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/ancient-historians-151177>
"Ancient Historians", 29 July 2003, Accessed.26 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/ancient-historians-151177
For example, in the United States, the Civil War occurred less than 150 years ago, and yet different historians provide conflicting perspectives about the causes of the war, why it was lost, and the consequences of the war for America's history. Moreover, it was only after the Civil War and the end of slavery that one began to see widespread, reliable publication about various slave rebellions that had occurred
Another notable development and contribution of ancient from Greek is the Olympics. The event was begun in Greek as an entertainment session but later evolved into an international event. Additional invention of Greek is the architecture. The Greek were immensely talented in art and, therefore, the exemplary architectural inventions and developments in the modern world today. They all can trace the history of the building system in this ancient
For the most part, he appears to make the most of the sources of evidence that are existent and available to scholars today to reach his findings regarding aspects of Egyptian communal life. Still, the most convincing aspects of that identity are the external ones that exist in relation to tangible markers of culture. The many illustrations, hieroglyphic text, and analyses of Egyptian architecture allows for some relatively simple
Ancient Art Art in the Ancient World Polykleitos, Doryphoros (early fourth century BC) As Paul Johnson (2003) notes, this ancient example of Greek classicalism "epitomizes a canon of male beauty embodied in mathematical proportions" (p. 63). Showing the perfection of contraposto, Doryphoros (or the spear-carrier) is a balanced representation of the body's muscles. Polykleitos, a contemporary of Phidias, had his own school of young artists, which carried on into the third century BC.
Ancient History The ancient histories of Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations have much in common. Both regions were inhabited since prehistoric times by nomadic groups, which began to settle down in towns and villages by around 6000 BCE. Consistent settlements soon grew into larger cities; in both Egypt and in Mesopotamia, these cities became city-states with complex lifestyles and forms of government. Some of the first written languages were created simultaneously in
As Richard Polidoro and Uriel Simri (1996) write, " Most of the athletes participating in the Games of 676 BC probably came from various Peloponnesian districts and had a relatively short distance to travel. Some participants, however, may have traveled from communities located outside the immediate vicinity. Under the sacred truce, or ekecheiria, the athletes, officials, and spectators were guaranteed safe passage to and from Olympia." Another important factor to note
Ancient Chinese Bronzes The existence of the believed first prehistoric Chinese dynasty of Xia from the 21st to the 16th century was assumed a myth on account of scientific excavations at early bronze-age sites in Anyang, Henan Province in 1928 (Crystal 2004) (Poon). But archaeological finds in the 1960s and 1970s, consisting mainly of urban sites, bronze implements and tombs, provided evidence to the existence of a Xia civilization in the