The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 01 : $b Prolegomena; Egypt, Mesopotamia
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 01 : $b Prolegomena; Egypt, Mesopotamia
World history
The case is somewhat different with Egypt and with Mesopotamia,
since the climate of the former and the resistant character of the
writing materials employed by the latter have permitted the modern
world to receive direct messages that, under other circumstances,
must inevitably have been lost. But even here the historical records
are neither so abundant nor so comprehensive in their scope as might
have been hoped. History-writing, in anything like a comprehensive
meaning of the words, is a relatively modern art. The nearest approach
to it among the nations of remote antiquity got no farther than the
recording of the personal deeds of individual kings. Such records,
indeed, are excellent materials for history, but they hardly constitute
history by themselves. The entire lists of Egyptian inscriptions, so
far as known, suffice merely to give glimpses of Egyptian history;
and if the Mesopotamian records are, in this regard, somewhat more
satisfactory, it is only in reference to a comparatively brief
period of later Assyrian history that they can be said to have
anything like comprehensiveness. As to the other nations of Oriental
antiquity,--Indians, Persians, Syrians, the inhabitants of Asia
Minor,--the entire sum of the monumental records that have been
transmitted to us amounts to nothing more than a scattered series of
vague suggestions.
In the classical world Rome is but little better off than Greece in
this regard. As to both these countries, we depend for our knowledge
almost exclusively upon the works of historians of a relatively late
period. Before Herodotus, who lived in the fifth century B.C., there
is almost no consecutive history proper of Greece; and despite all the
efforts of archæologists, records of Roman progress scarcely suffice to
push back the prehistoric veil beyond the time of the banishment of the
kings. Indeed, even for a century or two after this event transpired,
the would-be historian finds himself still on very treacherous ground.
The reason for this is that there were no contemporary historians in
Rome in this early period; and until such contemporary chroniclers
appear, no secure record of history is possible.
Once it became the fashion to write chronicles of events, the custom
rapidly spread and took a fixed hold upon the people. From the day of
Herodotus there was no dearth of Greek historians, and after Polybius
there is an unbroken series of Roman chroniclers.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account