Exam Number B217373

Why is Thucydides often considered a most authoritative and objective

historiographer?
Make sure that you discuss his methodology in your answer.

The act of commemorating and recording past events was not invented by Herodotus and
Thucydides, but the manner in which historical events are recorded, the style of writing and
the scientific method in assuring the reader of the accuracy of a historical writing was
pioneered by Thucydides. Upon writing his History of the Peloponnesian War Thucydides
himself writes of the importance of documenting the War, stating it to be the “greatest
commotion that ever happened among the Greeks”' (Book 1:1:1). Thucydides goes on to
make many more statements asserting that not only is the Peloponnesian War the most
important conflict of his age, but the most accurate detailing of it has come from him. One of
his most famous quotes summarising the motivation for his writing was, In his own words; “I
have written my work not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a
possession for all time”. (1.22.3-4). By producing his works Thucydides acknowledges that
he is entering into a tradition of writing that maintains a high standard. Despite the
expectations set by previous historians who previously have written not necessarily from a
place of scientific fact but rather covering a wide array of media and genres.1
The ancient historian Herodotus is often referred to as the “father of history”. Thucydides
was the next most noteworthy ancient historian to come after Herodotus and despite being
the successor to Herodotus he is regarded by many scholars to be the “Father of all true
history”, Therefore positioning him as the greatest of the Ancient Greek historians with a
legacy still being felt today. Thucydides had to set himself apart from those who came before
him and prove himself to be a reliable and authoritative source for future generations. He
accomplishes this and sets a great legacy as a reliable, objective and informative historian.
This is accomplished through his stern and unbiased way of sourcing information and
displaying it. Not seeking to push any political agenda but rather to give a wholly accurate
study of events and human nature both for those at the time of writing and for later students. 2

Through his upbringing in the Athenian intellectual tradition and the travels of his military
service and subsequent exile he developed the methodology of cross referencing and

1 Grethlein, Jonas. Page 18

2 Grethlein, Jonas Page 22
constant fact checking. At the time of writing this was an innovation which was not as clear in
the work his predecessor Herodotus. Thus this set Thucydides apart from other ancient
historians and leads him to be considered a most authoritative and objective source of
information, both for the study of history but also the study of political science, as his work
focuses also on the political personalities that were at play during the Peloponnesian war.
Being born roughly in 460 BC in Athens Thucydides lived to see the Peloponnesian war in its
entirety, early on in the conflict he was elected to one of the ten Athenian strategoi of the
year and through his connections he was given command of the fleet near the Khalkidhiki
Peninsula. However, under his command the Spartan forces overwhelmed the Athenian
defences in certain areas and the key city of Amphipolis was lost. Due to this lack of
oversight Thucydides was removed from his post and sentenced into exile. Where this will
have been disastrous for his career as a military leader he later admits that this was greatly
beneficial for his work as a historiographer where he was crucially able to travel into lands
occupied by allies of the Peloponnesian side or the lands of Sparta itself in order to gather
the perspective of his former enemies. This attests to his first hand knowledge as both a
general and a historian3.

An example of his source based information methodology is found in book one. Where he
writes that the information he presents rests “partly on what I saw myself and partly on what
others saw for me, the accuracy of the report being always tried by the most severe and
detailed tests possible (1.22.1-2). This is a bold claim for an ancient historian but as there
are examples of his commitment to source only fact this is a claim that can be believed by
scholars. To give an example of this is the Treaty off alliance between the Athenians,
Argives, Eleans and Mantineans. Where Thucydides summarises the key features of the
treaty. Thucydides does not quote any formal source for his information of the treaty. He
relies purely on his own interpretation of what he has seen and heard from others. Clearly,
his instinct in writing accurate history is finely tuned. As carvings in Athens which speak
about the Athenian treaty of alliance in 420 BC match up with the passage by Thucydides,
though not word for word. Showing that Thucydides has been able to display information
accurately even without the resource of formal documents. Thus this puts authority to his
word. Because he is correct in this instance there is nothing to lead scholars to believe that
he would lie about any other topic in his histories for political or personal reasons. This
impartiality and honesty has helped lead him to become one of the most trusted and
objective historiographers.

3 Finley, John H Page 63

It is the general consensus that the vast majority of Thucydides material does not derive its
information from documents, whether that be carvings or letters. For example there is no
source given for the numbers of the ships and commanders dispatched as part of the
Athenian expedition sent to Corcyra.4 This information and that of similar events will have
been discovered by Thucydides either from his own presence or his relying on others who
he trusts to give an accurate account of what has happened, as part of this reliance of others
Thucydides takes into account the way in which those people were involved and if that will
influence their description. So the way in which information is gathered whether as part of
private conversations or public speeches is also examined closely by Thucydides for
potential straying from the whole truth. This manner of conducting historical research
through cross checking sources is entirely new and pioneered by Thucydides. An example
that attests to the honesty of Thucydides is that he is willing to admit that he is wrong at
points. In book two he writes on how the Thebans and the Plataeans have differing views on
an oath given to the Thebans. Thucydides does not try and invent new information in the
hope of satisfying his reader but admits that he has done all he can in finding out the truth
though oral tradition. This then leads scholars to believe that as Thucydides has the humility
to admit when he is wrong he can be trusted when the information he claims to be true. This
separates historical work from standard narrative driven literature and poetry which
previously were all indistinguishable from each other. In cross checking his work Thucydides
is showing that what he is writing is something distinct and new from the works of homer for
example. And that this work is not just showing his perspective but the perspective of many.
Being the first writer to show this Thucydides establishes himself as an authoritative and
objective historiographer.5

However Thucydides is not without criticism. One aspect of his work in which total accuracy
is not present is in the way his work is chronologically set and how to set the order of events
during a period of time where no era exists. The way time was kept in the Greek world varied
from city to city and generally revolved around the local magistrates and how long they ruled
for. A problem with this in a city like Athens is that the Archon changes every year. Thus for
extended periods of time such as the Pentecontaetia Thucydides mentions no dates
whatsoever in his writing summarising that “All these actions of the Hellenes against each
other and the barbarian occurred in the fifty years interval between the retreat of Xerxes and
the beginning of the present war” (1.118.1-2). Unfortunately this means that in order to find
the exact dates of events during this period other sources are required and Thucydides does

4 P. J. Rhodes Page 3

5 Greenwood, Emily Page 15

not suffice. Though there is very little he could have done to improve this given the
limitations of his time period. Having gone to great lengths to establish the chronology of
different events. In order to try and overcome this problem of chronology Thucydides tries to
establish the reigns of different Greek city states in order to then synchronise them to the
one specific event such as the thirty year truce or the conquest of Euboea. (2.2.1). it gathers
a good enough indication of when the war happened. Using governmental terms and
celebrations to establish chronology is used by the historians who come after Thucydides
especially linking the timeline of the Olympics to certain historical events. His way of writing
inside of a timeline often prevents the potential for a narrative flow to be established. This
contradicts from the writing style of Herodotus for example where a narrative flow is
prioritised over chronological accuracy for example repetition can develop in certain
passages, “such were the events of the winter and so ended the second year of this war of
which Thucydides was the historian”6 (2.70.4). This is a common theme in Thucydides work.
The priority is not on the pleasure of the reader but on the accuracy of the history. This is
very much purposeful by Thucydides as he is not trying to be funny or entertaining but purely
useful.
He does this in part to assert his writing over that of those who came before him. He writes
of the Logographoi whose writings he describes as more attractive for listening than with
regard to truthfulness. (1.21.1) So the seemingly mundane approach to chronology is
justified in his mind as truth takes priority. Despite the problems with chronology Thucydides
is still regarded as an authoritative and objective historiographer as he uses unique and
effective techniques to try and overcome the problems of chronology that he faces. Despite
not holding total accuracy he is still the most accurate historian of his age.7

Another key aspect of Thucydides writings that garner him the reputation of a most
authoritative and objective historiographer is his vivid description of the events that take
place during his lifetime. In his writing is the emphasis on the external appearance of the key
figure in the war and the impression that leaves on the populace. He is not suggesting that
the Peloponnesian war can be boiled down to a drama with actors involved. But he shows a
more political side to the different generals and the motives behind their actions. Whether to
stage strength in order to intimidate the enemy. Or to provide reassurance to the population
a certain general is protecting. Thucydides is able to observe multiple layers of the war in his
writing and expresses a hope that this is clear to the reader. There is a certain aspect of
Thucydides when it comes to his documentation of speeches, that shows his framing of
historical events in a more dramatic manner while still retaining to the truth.

6 Greenwood, Emily Page 17

7 Rhodes, P.J. Page 7
Early on in the histories Thucydides begins with covering speeches8, (1.22.2) What is clear
is that he has rewritten speeches in his own fashion, He has done this in order to allow a
speech that has been delivered in one situation and context to respond to a speech
delivered in another context in a way which cannot happened at the time. This helps portray
the political landscape for the time he is writing in and orient the reader into the wider context
of the speeches that are being displayed. Despite the re-writing of speeches this does not
take away from his claim of authenticity and accuracy. The arguments he displays in
speeches such as Pericles Funeral Oration are written with the belief that these arguments
were used at the time. Proof that none of the speeches recorded by Thucydides are simply
used by him to portray his own thoughts include the extent to which he allows his speakers
to disagree with one another. On areas of fact as well as opinion. This disagreement shows
that the speeches are genuine and convey the feelings of those who are speaking whether
they have the moral high ground or not.

To conclude the status of Thucydides as an objective and authoritative historiographer

stems from his introduction of cross checking information. The technique of balancing his
own opinions and personal experiences with those of others, whilst taking into account of
any potential bias that may be in play. Is a technique that shaped the recording of history
permanently. This is the main reason why Thucydides is regarded in such great esteem by
scholars. Fact checking and gathering the opinions of both sides and then presenting them
in an unbiased nature is still the aspiration of modern historians.9 The Thucydidean
methodology of synchronising different events across Greece in order to gain accurate
representation of the time period is also an example of pioneering research for his time
period. While his commentaries on the political life provides an insight into the political
leaders of the time and is studied by political scientists to this day. Thucydides legacy of
aspiring to produce accurate and informative material renders him worthy of the title “father
of all true history.”

8 Greithlein Jonas Page 22

9 Finley, John H Page 24
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Finley, John H. Three Essays on Thucydides. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1967. Publisher's Version

Grethlein, Jonas. “Establishing a New Genre: Thucydides and Non-Historiographic Memory.”

The Cambridge Companion to Thucydides, edited by Polly Low, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2023, pp. 17–30.

Greenwood, Emily. Thucydides and the Shaping of History, Bloomsbury Publishing Plc,
2005.

Rhodes P. J., Athenian Democracy, Thucydides Use of Evidence and Sources Edited by
Copyright Date: 2004 Pages 2-17

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War Thomas Hobbes, Ed.