The History Teacher's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, September, 1909Various
History
The History Teacher's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, September, 1909
Various
History -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals
The answer to the first question should be given in the form of three
parallel columns containing all the single affirmations found in the
different sources, references to similar details appearing on the same
line in the different columns, thus facilitating comparison. These
columns should be followed by (1) a column containing the common
details found in all the sources, (2) a second column of details
referred to by two sources, and (3) other columns containing details
given by but one source. In going through this operation all the
pupils will have noticed that Plutarch made use of the “Persians,”
and, consequently is not independent of Æschylus. Before the questions
concerning the independence and value of the sources can be answered,
the sources must be localized. Æschylus probably fought in the battle
of Salamis and was thus an eyewitness. Note, however, the character
of this source; a play performed before the Athenian people and
presented some seven years after the event. A play does not offer a
good opportunity to describe a battle in detail; the dramatist would be
influenced by his desire to produce a work of art and to impress his
audience; he would have forgotten much in the years that had passed
since the battle. Although the record of an eyewitness, we cannot look
upon this play as the best kind of evidence.
Herodotus was an infant, playing in the streets of Halicarnassus,
when the battle of Salamis was fought. He wrote his account nearly
fifty years later, basing it largely, almost wholly, upon oral
tradition, although it is highly probable that he was acquainted with
the “Persians” when he wrote. Nothing that Herodotus tells us here
came from personal observation, nor do we know where he obtained
his information, i. e., whether it was simply common report that he
gathered up, or whether he talked with the most reliable witnesses
of the battle. His account is less valuable than that of Æschylus
as a second-hand record, but its form--a direct, detailed prose
narrative--is more favorable to truth.
Plutarch lived _five hundred years_ after the battle and obtained
his information about it as a reader to-day would obtain information
about the voyages of Columbus, namely, by reading what later writers
had to say about them. He was not a critical historian--neither
was Herodotus--and often based his narrative upon the poorest kind
of evidence. He refers in this extract to four of the men of whose
writings he has made use, and one of them is Æschylus.
Unsatisfactory Evidence.
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