The father of history’ of history as called him, Herodotus was an ancient writer who was among the pioneers towards the approach of the reporting of history in skeptical and more logical way. He endeavored to identify myths and events as well as separate them and after identifying his sources, made points out of them by realizing his trust or not realizing. His article the ‘Histories’ is among the widely read accounts of ancient realities, legends and in particular, among the ancient Greece’s Persian invasion.
Dubbed as the ‘father of scientific history’, Thucydides, a Greek historian author is also a well renowned ancient history writer who also wrote many treasured articles including the famous ‘History of the Peloponnesian war’ Thucydides is famously known for his strict evidence searching based on strict standards and analysis as far as effects and causes are concerned. ‘Political realisms school’s father’ was also his nickname in regards that he viewed the relationships between nations as not based on right but might.
These two authors had their different ways of writing history as far as stylistically expressionism is concerned. They are several styles and approaches in writing depending on the author or rather the writer in which he tries to employ the reader’s eyes in his article by regularly and positively communicating with the reader. The most imperative part in any article is the flow of the content which attracts all eyes. Herodotus and Thucydides are among the most treasured ancient history writers who left marks in the history of writing especially in historical matters.
For instance, Thucydides, in developing the understanding of human nature, he shows a lot of concern especially when explaining a certain behavior or events such as, civil wars, massacres and others. In his History of the Peloponnesian War, in the argument between Athens and Melians, he is deeply concerned about emotions whereby through Athenians, despair is done away with, and replaced by hope whereby he tries to explain how hope is imperative and expensive commodity which comes as a result of hard work and whoever wants to test it, must be ready to sacrifice everything before testing it. This is artistically sign of humor that is meant to draw the reader’s passion (Pg, 462) the remarks in this article are primarily not factual pieces and therefore less historical and cannot be welcomed fully by historians since it is too narrative and therefore unfit for historical records. Such a book is largely acceptable in literature since it is narrative and therefore drama like. This is simply because it explains events relating them to present life. History is never written in narrative language therefore it becomes odd to include it as a factual piece of evidence when treasuring events. The conversations or rather the arguments that emerges through debate adds life to it making it more lively and not past about the past.
Unlike The Peloponnesian War, Herodotus’ Account of Marathon, fits and explains events very well since it is very historical in registering events that happened in a validly informal way since it only states events directly on how they occurred. For instance, in the first paragraph, it starts by directly introducing how the generals sent off a herald a Pheidippides who was professionally a runner and an Athenian by birth, how he gave back to Athenians an admirable account in return when he neared mount Parthenium and above Tegea (Pg, 1) This introduction has nothing to do with active humor since it directly reports on how events happened but not as if they are happening currently. History is meant to state clearly on what happened only in reported but not in narrative form and in that case, Herodotus qualifies in his book since events speaks for themselves unlike in Thucydides where there are active voices speaking on the subjects behalf. Another good example is when the war began; it repots exactly what happened whereby the two armies fought for a long time on a plain marathon. It also reiterates directly on how the Barbarian emerged victorious (Pg, 2). This guarantees the reader that whatever he is reading, happened long time ago and cannot be actively reframed in mind since the reader is reading the content himself and directly from its original structure. Pan-Hellenism affects the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars since; there is a reason to believe that variety and the plurality as well as of political reforms experiments and in both city state inter organization have been fielded with not only specialists but also historians and this may be due to convictions that the modern developments have not been superseded or the achievements of Greek polis.
In spite of this need of foundation concerning the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars, there is still indistinct references on chief sources like as Livy, Appianus and a variety of others with the intention of cooperatively shed some radiance on this difficult issue. Equally, imperative is the essential awareness of Roman strange guidelines afterwards; even though as expected, following the Gallic invasions, Rome took a much firmer position as compared to the Gauls, here will tranquil be enduring traces of an previous foreign policy which are spoken about and referenced to in the sources from instantaneously after the incursion. It is positively possible that plentiful of the men that served alongside the Gauls in the invasions unremitting doing so afterwards, moreover in the central body or the military, as strange in proceed guiding standards from previous to the Gallic invasions was positively not out of living wage reminiscence for the supporting survivors, despite how countless proceedings being shattered.
History is very imperative as far as the daily knowledge is concerned. It is clear that history defines a man and therefore no one runs away from it given the fact that in anybody’s future it depends largely on where one comes from depend largely.