Intro:
Paragraph 1:
Herodotus is credited for the invention of “history”, as he was the first to utilize the term for its modern definition. Raymond Kierstead states in his article: “With Herodotus we encounter the beginning of the historian’s attempt to wrestle with the concept of time: to give shape to time and to memory and to impose a certain order upon the seeming chaos of human actions over time.” To begin, Herodotus helped establish the definition of the word “history” in the context that it is used today, as a term explaining the justification and analysis of events and people. Herodotus himself first applied this word to describe his enquiries in his work. His works, known today as The Histories, have been the point of intrigue for
…show more content…
The central theme of The Histories focuses around the overwhelming struggle between the Greek and the Persians during series of battles in the Greco-Persian Wars (490-479 BCE). Herodotus worked to discover the factors that led to the emergence of Persia as an international powerhouse. To completely understand Persia’s growth, Herodotus began his investigation before the rise of the empire. He wrote about early leaders and important Persian victories, each influencing its growth in the future. Through this analysis, Herodotus adroitly builds the factors of modern historical inquiry that are still used today. To continue, Herodotus’ work tends to be an important insight on the wars because his accounts are one of the few primary sources of the wars still available from that time period. The Greco-Persian Wars themselves mark an important turning point not only in Greek history, but in the course of all European civilization as well. First and foremost, because of its victory Greece was saved from the threat of external rule and could develop on its own. In other words, it was the endeavour of the small Greek city-states of the west to remain free of the rule of their mighty adversary from the east, Persia. Herodotus travelled extensively and collected stories from people who had heard first-hand accounts of were able to speak from experience. As stated by Souza, Heckel, and Llewellyn-Jones in the book, The Greeks at War, “the Persian Wars are, therefore, the first wars for which there exists a detailed historical narrative written by [Herodotus] who was able to obtain detailed and reliable information.” To conclude, even with his exaggerations and redundancies, there is still some form of truth that historians can clue into to reveal the actual occurrences that might have taken place during the epic
The Role of Themistocles in the Greek Defeat of the Persians in 480 - 479 BC.
In early fifth century BC Greece, the Greeks consistently suffered from the threat of being conquered by the Persian Empire. Between the years 500-479 BC, the Greeks and the Persians fought two wars. Although the Persian power vastly surpassed the Greeks, the Greeks unexpectedly triumphed. In this Goliath versus David scenario, the Greeks as the underdog, defeated the Persians due to their heroic action, divine support, and Greek unity. The threat of the Persian Empire's expansion into Greece and the imminent possibility that they would lose their freedom and become subservient to the Persians, so horrified the Greeks that they united together and risked their lives in order to preserve the one thing they all shared in common, their "Greekness".
In Histories, Herodotus’ uses a variety of themes to narrate historical events and a common theme revolves around hubris. Extremely common amongst Greek literature and Greek mythology, hubris appears to be the infamous human trait. Greek mythology sees hubris as a great atrocity and results in an unrelenting punishment. The idea of hubris is that an individual with an authoritative position, a strong or influential leader, becomes extremely proud of his exceptional qualities and forms a delusion of his position to be on par with even the Gods. This blinds the hubristic individual into believing he can defy the Gods and elude ones inevitable fate. Herodotus’ Histories is no exception to containing individuals that display hubristic qualities similar to many other significant historical entities. In Histories, the theme of hubris assists the reader in making a connection between the excerpts from the end of book 1 (1-204-206) to other books and excerpts in Herodotus’ Histories.
Xerxes was a man of power. The Great King of Persia, his empire encompassed the majority of the known world. On his invasion of Greece in the spring of 480BCE, he reportedly commanded a horde of over two million men. Even the Greek oracle at Delphi encouraged prudence in face of such an overwhelming force (7.140). Thus the question arises of why such an army failed to compel Greece into submission. I will explore this with focus on the key battles and the important factors, most notably the timing of the attack, the quality of his expeditionary force and Xerxes’ personal faults.
However, Heroditus’ Histories briefly detail the major events of the war, and relays them as if they were historical fact. Heroditus’ account of the war differs slightly from Homer’s version, and he is well aware of this. After relating the tale of Alexander (Paris) carrying off Helen, Heroditus writes:... ... middle of paper ... ...
Bury, J. B.; Russell Meiggs (2000). A History of Greece to the Death of Alexander the Great
Herodotus. “Greece Saved from Persian Conquest.” Readings in Ancient History. Eds. Nels M. Bailkey and Richard Lim. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002.
This paper will offer a commentary on Herodotus’ Histories 2.129-135. Book Two of Histories concerns itself with Egypt; specifically chapters 99-182 detail rulers of Egypt both legendary and actual. Book Two is distinct from the other books in Histories as it is in this book that we predominantly experience Herodotus as an investigator. More precisely it is in Book Two that Herodotus treats first person experience not as direct evidence but as a method of assessing the accounts of others. Chapters 129-135 provide us with the tale of King Mycerinus as recounted by whom Herodotus refers to in 2.127 as simply ‘ÆGYPTIOI’. These Egyptians are referred to at various points in Book Two and at times appear to refer to what might be termed ‘Egyptians in general’ . However, we can make a reasonable assumption in this instance, given what has been stated before at 2.99 and what is stated later at 2.142, that the Egyptians that provide Herodotus with the tale of King Mycerinus are probably priests. It should not be assumed that priests are any more reliable than the lay Egyptian in Histories however; the Egyptian priesthood did not necessarily concern itself with historical accuracy. Indeed the inclusion of priests may simply be a Herodotean literary device designed to reinforce his reader’s credulity.
While Simon Hornblower acknowledges the limitations of the alliance, he is perhaps the strongest proponent of the importance of Persia’s financial support. He recognizes that Sparta’s victory at Notion in 407 was as much the result of poor Athenian leadership as Persian money, and that this financial backing did not prevent the disastrous loss at Arginusai the following year. Despite these statements, Hornblower is adamant that “The Peloponnesian War had been won because of Persian money.” P.F. Rhodes continues this reasoning in A History of the Classical Greek World, 478-323. He contends that Persia’s assistance helped Sparta effectively combat Athens at sea, and allowed them to remain engaged until Athens could no longer continue. These theories all center around the question of why Sparta won the war. However, if we flip our perspective and examine why Athens lost the war, Persia’s money becomes considerably less significant. It is to this examination that we now turn our
Herodotus was an interesting historian. His way of displaying a historical event such as the Persian War is different from how I expect a modern day historian to write it. He does not try to focus only on the Persian war but he goes into detail some times of the lineage of the rulers of the city-states even though that serves little relevance to the actual war. The accounts of history I am used to reading are more focused on the bigger issue and the historians do not deviate on long trains of side thoughts such as Herodotus does. Herodotus style of writing had me confused because he often would start on one topic and in the next couple of sentences move on to another topic before coming back to his main point about a paragraph down. I had to
The Greeks were able to continue living the way they had done so. Themistocles, though, let his ambitions overpower him. This then resulted in a rage of the assembly. He was banned from Greece and forced to flee to the country he once had fought, Persia. There he became a Persian, being able to speak Greece and also serving as one of the administrators for the Persian king. The Persian war has a significant importance because if they would have lost this war then the values that we know even till today would have been lost. They extraordinary values gave us what is known to be the Classical
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
Greece and Persia are two of the four great empires that rose to the top rapidly. Both empires have well organized political systems that greatly influenced the way later governments were structured in the United States and Europe. Greece and Persia empire’s structures weighed greatly on their development and growth, but the diverse topographies of Greece and Persia also made a vast impact. These features affected the cultures and even how the political government changed overtime.
When examining the causes for the Peloponnesian War, which was between 431-404 B.C., there are a number of causes that factored into the cause of this war. However, one of the most important causes to this war was largely due to the fact that the Spartans feared the growing power and success of Athens. The Spartans were “particularly alarmed at the growing power of Athens” (Cartwright, “Peloponnesian War”). During the Persian war in 479 BC, Athens grew fiercely strong with power with help of its many allies and continued with their no mercy attacks on Persian territories. When the Persians left Greece, Athens further enraged Sparta when they built large and tall walls around its empire in the event of an attack, which was mostly thought to be from Sparta if it happened.
The Peloponnesian War is the conflict between the pelopoponesians league led by Sparta and the Delian league, led by Athens. Much of our knowledge on the causes and events of the Peloponnesian War, depends on the Athenian Thucydides 460-400 BC, writer of the History of the Peloponessian War. He servd as an Athenian commander in Northern Greece during the early years of the war until the assembly exiled him as he lost an outpost to the enemy. During this exile, he was able to interview witnesses on both sides of the conflicted. Unlike Heredotus he concentrated on contemporary history and presented his account of the war in an annalistic framework that only occasionally diverts from chronological order. In his account, he discuses the precursors to the war, including the 30 years truce and revolutions, such as the stasis in Corcyra. When looking at wars, the primary focus is normally the fighting itself, such as what we see for World War II. However, it is important to look at the anatomy of war, meaning what effect the war has on the people who are experiencing it first hand, and the consquences that the conflict has on the rest of the world. Therefore in this essay I shall discuss, drawing directly from Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, how the civilians reacted to the war, their involvement and socio economic factors. Furthermore, the first section of my essay shall focus on the direct effect of war on the people, regarding the plague, and violence and hopelessness that was experienced. Then I shall go on to discuss more general effects of the war and how it affected the Greek world, discussing the social and economic losses that occurred such as the cost of the war in attica, the coup d’etat that occurred in gove...