Polybius and the fragmented Histories

正在查看此主题的用户

I started reading a translation of Polybius' The Histories a while ago, and about halfway through the work, I noticed it's fragmented, only parts of it surviving the test of time. While the fragments I have read so far are still interesting, I have doubts about their usefulness in gaining a decent insight into what the complete work was about. So this is a question primarily for those who already have read it; is it worth reading the latter half for anything but fun? If no, any recommended works that cover European history approximately the same period? If yes, great, but can you recommend a work that succeeds it?
 
I actually wondered the same a while ago, curious what this thread will bring. Maybe good stuff even.
 
I know more about empire than early republic, but as far as I know Polybius provides pretty much a unique insight into the Greek and Roman worlds of that period, due to his interesting perspective of being a Greek now on the "Roman side" as it were. Fortunately for you, the nature of that era and the following 2 or 3 centuries was one of literature, and we have a very rich set of texts, covering all sorts of things. Below I'm just putting 'Histories', but if you want to branch out into farming, water, architecture, poetry etc., you can.

I don't know as much about the Greek side of things, but I guess Arrian's Anabasis of Alexander the Great might be of interest to you, not something I've read though.
Appian's Bellum Civile is worth reading, covering the slightly later period, and the Lives of Plutarch make very interesting reading. I'd say the latter would be your best bet, covering a wide date range in very interesting ways. Bear in mind he was writing in the 2nd century AD though.
Livy's Ad Urbe Condita (or so it is often called, sometimes just Histories) is fragmentary in parts, some bits only known to us through what's called the Epitome, a later summary of the work. It covers the history of Rome from 753 BC up to the 1st century BC in a logical way, easy to read for someone without too much knowledge of the times.
Sallust's Bellum Jugurthinum, Bellum Catilinae and very fragmentary Histories cover the last century BC, and Caesar's Gallic Wars and Civil War are relatively easy and fun to read in my opinion, looking at the end of the 1st century BC.
In terms of succeeding things, Velleius Paterculus' history isn't widely known outside of those knowledgeable about the subject, and it must be read with some caution and knowledge of its writer. Tacitus provides what is probably the most complete and closest-at-hand account of the first century AD, with his Annals and Histories. The Annalistic basis might make it quite hard to read if you're not that interested in the details, but if read in conjunction with a good history book/wikipedia you should enjoy it. Suetonius' Lives of the Caesars is a wonderful gossipy set of works on the first few emperors, court intrigue and affairs and the like, very opinionated (not that Tacitus isn't) but easier to read.
Later still you have Cassius Dio's Histories, ritten in the 2nd century AD, very long, fragmented in parts, attempt at history of Imperial Rome. Borrows heavily from Tacitus and Suetonius and other authors, gets some things wrong, gets others right.
Later still you have Ammianus Marcellinus' Histories, an attempt at continuing Tacitus. Unfortunately lots of bits lost to us, but still a fair amount to read if you're interested in the later Roman empire, 3rd century AD onwards and the shift to Christianity.

With any of these texts though, bear in mind that you mustn't treat them as true, unbiased history (if such a thing is possible). They were written with purposes in mind, and in a time when the idea of history was not the same as it is now. But enjoy :smile: Hope this is helpful. There's a lot of material here, should take you a few months/years :wink: If you need more though this is far from everything :grin:
 
Super reply, thank you a lot. Okay, I will finish Polybius then.

Oh, dear, what to choose next. I already read Arrian's Anabasis, and yes, I found it very interesting. Plutarch's Lives is in my digital bookshelf too. At first glance I thought it looked somewhat difficult for an amateur like me to get into, but maybe it will be easier if I read Livy's work first. Regarding Livy, I have the impression that he has a reputation for being biased and inaccurate, more so than most other ancient writers. Any thoughts about that? I take all historical works with a grain of salt, but it's nice to know if I should take several grains.

As for the rest of the works you mention, I guess I will look at them after/if I get through Livy and Plutarch. Not sure how much I can fit into my head. Again; thank you a lot.
 
Pleasure! As you might be able to tell, it's kinda what I love in life (also my degree). Livy, in terms of bias, is quite a tricky one. Obviously he is writing late 1st C. BC/Early 1st C. AD, so he is quite removed from a lot of the early stuff. What he writes I guess you might ascribe to being the (or one?) popular Roman mythologisation of their own history, and likely to be removed somewhat from the truth. Obviously the roots of one's civilisation are something to be elaborated, heroes placed on their podiums, and national sentiment injected into everything. So yes, removed temporally, and with a strong 'Roman' inclination vs other peoples. Class wise, Livy is from a wealthy background - that's the reason he could write and the reason it has been preserved, but that is something that is a problem perennial to nearly all ancient texts, something you should always keep in mind. The lower classes are nearly always a silent majority.
Personally I wouldn't say that what I've read of Livy has been that bad however, at least in comparison to Tacitus or Suetonius, say, in terms of political leaning. Much of the early history of Rome is politics of plebeians vs senators, so just keep in mind Livy was from a more privileged background, but also a provincial one, which might effect some of the writings on conquest of Italians.
Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to read all of Livy, and what I have read has been in rather bad Penguin translations, so I'm not an expert on it.
As you remark, take things with a pinch of salt, and you'll be fine. Always consider the background of the author, the times in which he is writing, and any motivations he might have behind his writing.
Enjoy :smile:
 
后退
顶部 底部